DWP disability minister Stephen Timms is still desperately trying to hide the truth about pension age PIP claims.  But his answers to an MP’s written questions make it clear that pension age PIP claimants will be subject to the four point rule, no matter how hard the DWP tried to hide that fact. 

From November 2026, Labour proposes that PIP claimants will not be eligible for the daily living component unless they score 4 points or more in at least one activity.

Whenever challenged about the harshness of this rule, the DWP falls back on the assertion that it will encourage claimants with less severe conditions to seek work – in spite of PIP being available to disabled claimants regardless of their employment status.

However, even this spurious justification falls apart if the 4 point rule is applied to pension age claimants, who nobody expects to start looking for work if their PIP is taken from them.

So, up until now, the DWP have repeatedly used a particular form of words to cover the fact that there is no exemption for pension age claimants:  “In keeping with existing policy, people of state pension age are not routinely fully reviewed and will not be affected by these changes.”

It is the case that pension age PIP claimants are supposed to only be subject to a light touch review every ten years.  But a light touch review is still a review and must apply the existing law.

And, as we have pointed out, currently more than 10,000 pension age PIP claimants have a planned award review every year and 20,000 more request a change of circumstances review because their needs have increased.

So, unless they are exempt from the 4 point rule, they risk losing their award if they do not score 4 points or more for any activity.

To try to get the DWP to admit this truth, on 6 May we asked readers to ask their MPs to put two written questions to the secretary of state for work and pensions.  The questions were:

“Will existing PIP claimants of pension age who are subject to a planned award review from November 2026 be required to score at least four points in one daily living activity in order to maintain their award?”

“Will existing PIP claimants of pension age who request a change of circumstances review from November 2026 be required to score at least four points in one daily living activity in order to maintain or increase their award?”

On 8 May Conservative MP Alicia Kearns kindly asked those questions and Timms replied on 16 May.

The responses only needed to be a simple “Yes they will” or “No they won’t”.

Instead, Timms fell back once again on the “not routinely fully reviewed” form of words, but then added:

“All claimants are required to notify the Department of any change to their circumstance, be that an improvement or deterioration in their needs. Upon notification of a change, a Case Manager will consider what further action might be required to ensure the claimant is receiving the correct level of support.”

It is a carefully crafted politician’s answer, designed to obscure the truth without telling an outright lie.

But a case manager considering “what further action might be required to ensure the claimant is receiving the correct level of support” is exactly what happens whenever any PIP claimant requests a change of circumstances review.  Either the case manager will request an assessment of the claimant by the Health Assessment Advisory Service and then make a decision or they will make a decision on the claim using the available evidence, possibly after contacting the claimant and the claimant’s own health professionals.

The decision will be based on the law as it stands at the time and, because Labour are not exempting pension age PIP claimants from the 4 point rule, that is the law that will be applied.

So, if a pension age claimant asks for a change of circumstances review with the aim of moving from standard to enhanced PIP then, unless they are assessed as scoring four points or more for one activity, they will lose their daily living award entirely.

That is the truth that Timms is desperately trying to hide with his politician’s answer.

A much smaller proportion of pension age claimants are likely to be affected by Labour’s proposed change than working age claimants, but some will still be hit. Both pension age claimants and MPs, who will be required to vote on these proposals, have a right to be told that in plain language.

When he became disability minister, Timms claimed that he would create a new era of transparency at the DWP, as part of an effort to restore trust in the department.

But it turns out that being transparent – or trustworthy - is entirely incompatible with being a DWP minister.

You can read the full answers to the written questions here and here

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.
    · 17 days ago
    My contention is that since govt has couched the charges to PIP as a lever to encourage people into work, if it continues along this path without making retired people exempt from the changes, they are effectively forcing a raise in the retirement age for disabled people, without a change to Retirement Age Statute.

    We’re not just being targeted; this is discriminatory and illegal. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    What money will be saved as claimants cascade into homelessness, as we will?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    Light touch reviews for pensioners are NOT regular reviews.

    It consists of 3-5 pages ... "Has anything changed, "are you alive." etc.

    Just take the win... if it stats this way Pensioners currently on PiP should keep it.

    Just keep schtumm.

    Onky 7% of PiP claimants are on 10 year reviews. If half are also pensioners, only 3.5 per cent will be exempt from new rules.

    So no biggy... and optics look better... i.e not going after pensioners again.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 days ago
      @Lesley Timms has said that all reviews even soft touch will be done under new rules so it will affect everyone claiming pip 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Gabe Logan It gets tricky if they never had a 4 point score last time,to say no change  could potentially lose them their pip
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Gabe Logan Im on ongoing pip enhanced on both counts without anymore assessments. Im 68 now and thankfully it wont affect me. I dont think.any pensioners will be part of the shakeup.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Maybe he is making a distinction between ongoing/indefinite PIP awards light touch AR2 form reviews with basically three questions where someone can just tick no change. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Well I'm only halfway though listening to this - but had to post it now!

    It's sheer gold & I think every MP should listen to it!!!


    I'll be back when I've listened to the rest of it!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Gingin Agreed, boils my blood!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Yeah, it’s really good. But the DWP response at the end triggers my rage, as always. Labour leadership is displaying the worst of humanity. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard This is a podcast from the Mirror.

      Once again, I am so impressed having listened to the whole podcast - is it just me? Or this just amazing?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard listening now
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    Carers UK is holding online 'listening briefings' with MPs next week - some are just for Labour MPs and others for opposition MPs. I think it's by invitation and I hope to attend 2 out of the 3 they've invited me to. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @gingin Just watched you on Carers UK you tube after the sent an email with the video linked in it 👍
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Yorker Bard- hahhahaha! (No!)
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard two's too many.  Keep coming back it works if you work at it! ;-)
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @gingin Gingin

      I was going to say, "Don't hold back".

      Then I remembered that you said that you don't!

      In addition - is a single gin never enough?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    DPAC reported a good turnout for the Norfolk demo apparently- approx 300 turned up. I’m itching to get to a demo as soon as one turns up within reasonable distance  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Gingin You go @Gingin 👏wish I could. Thank you. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @James Language with these resonances should never be used. If Lineker can lose his job over inappropriate and offensive tweets, how are politicians allowed to get away with it? And by the way, can we please avoid the phrase 'final solution'.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @James @James- Alternatively, "spineless, unprincipled coward", now I've looked at that article!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    One thing about Starmer is his ability to keep on track of alienation of pensioners, waspi women, small businesses, poor families, disabled and sick, LGBT community and now ethnic minorities. It seems he opens his mouth to change feet!  He has turned into Reform member at the rate he is going and destroying the labour party that once stood for social justice and equality.  Let's hope Labour MPs see him to be an enemy o workingf people and their families 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @robbie He is very lacking in foresight. By picking on all the minorities we make up the majority. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @James @James - Your list demonstrates just how particularly Starmer picks weaker minorities and those worst placed to fight back. There's a name for someone who does that. Oh yes, bully.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    So basically if you have a 10 yr award say from April 25 it will still stand and you will be reviewed may be a yr before the award ends say 2034?unless your circumstances change.
    The new rules if passed will affect new claims and any claims ending after Nov 26 is that right please can anyone explain thank you 
    As surely if you have it in writing from dwp an end date this has to be law and cannot just be altered due to new rules being introduced 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Thomas
      No full "reviews" for 10 yearlys. In theory.

      Just a firm to say you're still alive and nothing has changed.

      No "reassessment...  means no re-scoribg" ... I hope.

      No pronouncedment has been made yet. It is all speculative. So we will see.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @rookie
      Oh they've certainly made sure they've got license to do what they want, whenever they want.  

      Starmer and his cronies have certainly thought through the legalities to make sure they can do what they like and get away with as much as possible, even moreso than they had license to do previously.

      On the face of it, backlogs, staff shortages and all, you'd think they wouldnt be able to cope with reviewing people.  I'm reading of people who are being reviewed for both PIP and LCWRA 17 months before they are due.  Many reporting they're already having their previous points and particularly their 4 point scores reduced.  It seems the DWP are already pre-enacting or pre-empting these plans before they've even been signed into law.  They've probably already been instructed by the gestapo to get started on the final solution.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Thomas Thomas, that’s exactly why they change the rules. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Mick @Mike, "they can actually review your claim any time" - that's the thing. I've always found that outrageous - it's just licence to do what they want. Given the dwp workload atm, I can't see them doing extra reviews, though.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Thomas
      That's what they are saying yes.  Whether that is ultimately what is signed into law or, honoured or not, is another thing entirely.  This is the DWP and a lying, scheming government we're dealing with.

      Bear in mind that there will be another general election if your award extends beyond 2029.  Who knows what the next lot will pull out of the magical final solution hat for us.

      Also, they can actually review your claim any time.  Having a ten year award doesn't guarantee they won't review your claim until 12 months before the end date.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    It seems like they’re trying to get pensioners onto AA so they can’t get any mobility.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Claire Not touching mobility protects a multi billion industry called Motability. Plus there's no excuse for you not being able to get to an interview or job if you still have access to a car or similar.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @rtbcpart2 Ha ha ha. The only trouble if I started doing that the DWP would say that I am well enough to work. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @lesley lesley, maybe if you could sing and dance a bit, or pick pockets? 😉 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Bud
      Am a pensioner.  77 years old, wonder if I will make it to 78 at this rate.
      I get middle care D.L.A and low mobility, indefinitely. Terrified to try for any more!  More?????
      Get ye to the workhouse!

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Claire Claire, it seems they got us all roads. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Some of you may remember that I penned an email to Stephen Timms on Fri 9th May to tell him that I am praying for him, & posted a copy on here. I have reposted it below (in case you didn't see it or have forgotten it).

    Sir Stephen Timms,

    I have just discovered that you are a member of Christians in Parliament group and have seen the group's website's recommendation that I should:

    Pray for your MP: that they will make wise decisions for the good of their constituents and that they will be able to cope with the stresses and strains of public office. Why not write to your MP to let them know that you are praying for them?

    So Sir Stephen, I am writing to tell you that I am praying for you.

    The website also suggests that I should:

    Pray for integrity, truth and compassion throughout Government.

    Sir Stephen, I am really. really praying for this.

    The only trouble is that I have, unlike you, no religion, so I can only offer up a sort of Humanitarian prayer.

    The Labour Government has truly lost it's way with regard to integrity, truth and compassion given that it has chosen to attack vulnerable disabled people who are currently in receipt of PIP.

    PIP is not an out of work benefit - I could seek work tomorrow, if my condition allowed, and still receive PIP. The proposed changes will not help people into work at all.

    Your Government is fast becoming adept at using smoke and mirrors - I despair!

    In the words of Dave Allen,

    "Goodnight and may your God go with you"


    In order to get rid of the usual spam and rubbish, I have just checked my junk mail folder. 
    GUESS WHAT? A REPLY FROM STEPHEN TIMMS!!!

    Dear

    Thank you for your email.

    According to survey evidence, there are currently some 200,000 people out of work on health and disability grounds who would love to be in work, and believe they could be if they had the support to make it possible for them to get a job. We are determined to provide that support. The last Labour Government provided that support, in the New Deal for Disabled People. This Labour Government will provide it again.


    That wouldn’t be possible if the current, unsustainable rate of increase in spending on PIP carried on. Spending has almost doubled in real terms since the year before the pandemic, and it increased by £2.8 billion, above inflation, in the last year alone. The changes we have proposed will mean, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, that an estimated 10% of those who currently receive PIP Daily Living will lose it by 2029-30. The cost of PIP will continue to increase every year in real terms, but the rate of increase will no longer be unsustainable.

    Best wishes,

    Sir Stephen Timms

    Minister for Social Security and Disability


    An estimated 10% of those who currently receive PIP Daily Living will lose it by 2029-30

    Does he really believe these figures?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Timms may claim to be a Christian, but the DWP is clearly using a version of the Bible which is rather different to the standard text.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Yorkie Bard Mr Timms says theirs 200,000 disabled people that want to work well how does he know that and just because they would want to work it doesn’t mean they can work does it
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard He didn't thank you for praying for him. Rude.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    It is imperative that disabled and sick people register themselves to vote and also take up the options to do postal votes. Since many of us will have ids as the government forced that upon us then it is a good time to use that to register and be ready as a bloc to vote for either the greens or libdems in any and all elections and stand up and be counted. I cannot implore everyone enough to do this as this is the only way we can legitimately get this government out. Also ask your own family and friends to do this so that we become a political force like all other groups with a strong voice of our own.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @James And in Scotland and Wales for the SNP and Plaid.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @James yes, we can rant here (and believe me, I love ranting), which often does hold value in sharing important information, but the real power is in wider campaigning and voting. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Thanks Benefits and Work for updating us on the latest duplicitous bs from the government.  

    Brilliant article link below: 

    https://nation.cymru/opinion/you-cant-cut-your-way-to-health-disability-benefits-and-the-politics-of-prevention-in-wales/
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Just a thought that we could send SLBs excellent x letter to our MPs by email.  I have also added a bit about the added consequences of their actions.  

    Subject: Thank you, if you are one of the 100 Labour MPs

    Dear 

    If you have been one of those who have signed the letter protesting against the disability benefit cuts – thank you.

    However, I hope you are fully aware of the true costs of the proposed changes. A disability campaigner has posted the following on X:


    ---

    Dear Labour MP
    It has been reported that 100 Labour MPs have signed a letter about their concerns regarding the disability benefit cuts, in particular the cut in amount for new claimants to LCWRA (health element) of Universal Credit. This worries me, because this part of the cuts is, in many ways, one of the least damaging.

    The benefit system for the disabled and long-term ill is ridiculously complicated, and I ask you to spend just three minutes of your time reading this post, which explains why the eligibility changes to PIP are far more worrying than the cut in amount paid through LCWRA UC. If you are going to be voting for or against changes that could devastate the lives of an estimated million-plus people, I’d like to think three minutes of your time is a fair exchange.

    So, why am I saying that the cut in amount to the health element of UC is one of the least worrying changes that have been proposed? Well, put simply, because virtually no-one will be eligible to claim it after 2028 anyway if the proposals go through.

    I’ll start with Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The changes to eligibility for PIP will mean that an estimated 87% of people who currently claim the lower rate of the Daily Living Element will no longer be able to claim it from their first reassessment after November 2026. This is a cut to our income of approximately £300 a month.

    This means that people who can’t cook a meal from scratch, can’t wash certain parts of their body, can’t use the toilet without assistance, and can’t cut up the food on their plate will most likely be shut out of PIP. And any illness or disability that affects us in that way most likely means there are many other issues of a similar nature which affect our daily routine – they just aren’t on the form.

    However, what comes next is the real killer (literally). Many people who claim PIP also claim the health element of Universal Credit. But under the new proposals, the Work Capability Assessment to decide whether or not we qualify for that element of UC is being scrapped in 2028. Instead, people will need to have the Daily Living Element of PIP in order to claim it – but, because of the changes to eligibility most people will no longer be able to claim that element of PIP, and therefore won’t be able to claim the health element of UC.

    And perhaps the most bizarre thing is that the mobility element of PIP won’t act as a passport to UC in the same way. So, even if we can only walk one metre, we still won’t be classed as disabled enough to claim the LCWRA/health element of UC.

    So, after losing PIP of £300 a month, we will also lose £400+ a month through our inability to claim the health element of UC. That’s £700+ a month we have lost. The change to the amount of health element of UC is going to be unimportant for most people because they won’t be able to claim it anyway.

    And we’re talking of 1.3 MILLION people.

    What’s more, various members of the government keep repeating the lie that these changes will get disabled people into work. THIS IS NOT TRUE. PIP is NOT an out-of-work benefit. It is money to compensate us for the extra expenditure that our disabilities cost us. If we lose PIP, we lose our independence. If we lose our independence we CAN’T work at all. Many use their PIP to ALLOW them to work.

    The change to PIP is not only shutting people out of that benefit, but also out of the health element of UC. It’s a double blow. One blow we might be able to deal with, but the second will, quite literally, be a killer.

    That’s approximately £8400 a year many of us are losing, or, to put it another way, it’s 28 times the amount that pensioners are losing because of the changes to Winter Fuel Allowance.

    We fully understand how ridiculously complicated the disability benefits system is (and I haven’t even mentioned carer’s allowance that some people will also lose), but it’s ESSENTIAL that you know the basics of it as outlined above before you vote.

    Every Labour MP on X will be tagged/mentioned in a post containing the above explainer. It has been a long process putting that list of close to 400 X handles together, but if just one of you has read the above and now understands the system better, and why the disabled community is so frightened, then it has, of course, been worth it. If nothing else, please don’t get taken in by the lies that this will get people back into work. That will not happen. The only effect the cuts will have is the destruction of people’s lives due to a condition or illness that they have no control over.

    Thank you for your time.


    ---

    The full impact of these proposed changes does not take into account the wider social and economic consequences: increased pressure on the NHS, rising homelessness, mental health crises, addiction, and policing costs. Nor does it consider the loss of informal caring and volunteering roles that many people with fluctuating health conditions currently carry out—quiet contributions that support the most vulnerable and hold whole sections of our society together. The weeks ahead are critical.

    If you agree with the concerns raised in this letter and have already signed something to that effect, thank you again. If you haven’t yet, I hope you will consider doing so—and please do share this with colleagues who may not yet fully grasp the scale of what is unfolding.

    With best wishes
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @CaroA You are certainly welcome to do that, but I think this week probably isn't the time.  I say that because MPs have a ten days or so away from Westminster from Thursday, and it might be better to send them a letter when they return rather than just before they leave, where it might get stuck in a mail box and then discarded with hundreds of others.  It's not quite the same on X, as they'll either see it when it drops (the first one will be 10am tomorrow) or not at all anyway, as social media posts just tend to drop down the screen after a short time.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    BBC news just now

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Mand My report, which I just looked back on, says "you have had no repeat of a knife injury." So you have to repeatedly hurt yourself to prove you can't do something!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Mand That's all I got too.  I never bothered asking for a reconsideration because it wouldn't have made a difference to my award.  But it will when eligibility changes come into force. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Anon Thanks.  I haven't peeled or chopped  veg since, and couldn't do it as I have little grip. I seem to spend half my life picking things up from the floor! 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @SLB The assessor I had asked me if I could fry or boil an egg as apparently that counts as making  a simple meal from fresh ingredients ,I said no,I can't cook anything at all because of my cronic daily vertigo, I recieved 2 points for needing a chair to sit on when cooking!! That wasn't even mentioned at the assessment atall!!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @SLB Oh, I'm so sorry that happened to you and that I misunderstood your question!

      And yes, you're absolutely correct. To put it simply, if you cannot cook at all without supervision or assistance from another person and it results in limiting your access to a cooked meal most days, you absolutely should score four points. I'm in the same boat as you. I've managed to make myself ill a few times due to improperly cooked microwave meals because I need supervision in order to cook the food properly. I only scored a two anyway despite telling my assessor this.

      But good luck with getting your four points! Like I said, the context as to WHY is very important for most questions, honestly. Hence why that BBC report made me fume. lol

      Perhaps try and get a report from the hospital you were admitted to in order to provide evidence as to what you're saying too. Good luck once again.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Timms is extremely good at opposing welfare cuts when in opposition. Bit different now he's a DWP minister. What a surprise. NOT!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @Frances @Frances, Indeed, a very clear article, exposing the party leadership's reluctance to debate or consult. Starmer has relied on a huge numerical majority, and, typically, has shown no regard for the individuals who amassed it. He's taken the support for granted, thinking mps will get behind whatever he says, regardless of whether it's consistent with the grounds on which he, and they, were elected. Well they're not having it. We're not having it.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Timms has now uttered, on several occasions, a two part sentence.

    Part one of Timms's sentence:

    "In keeping with existing policy, people of state pension age are not routinely fully reviewed..."

    That is simply a statement of facts/a giving of information. It is superfluous to an answer to our question. We do not need background; we do not need an explanation which appears to suggest it should be obvious that/why the new rules will not apply to pensioners.

    Part two of Timms's sentence:

    "....and will not be affected by these changes." (my italics)

    That is a statement of fact/intention. Following part one of his sentence, part two of his sentence means people of state pension age - all people of state pension age, not some, not most, not many, never mind whether they are routinely or fully reviewed, never mind what their surname begins with, never mind their postcode or whether they have weatabix for breakfast, never mind anything - will not be affected by these changes.

    It would be very difficult to argue that the meaning of Timms's sentence is anything other than:

    "people of state pension age will not be affected by these changes"

    because all the other words in his sentence contribute nothing to an answer to our question, nor do any of those unnecessary words contradict his statement of fact/intention or state any exceptions.

    If Timms has tried to leave the door open, by being less than concise, to going back on what is a statement he has uttered and put in writing several times, he has done a very bad job, and we must hold him to his own declaration.

    Labour ARE exempting pension age PIP claimants from the 4 point rule:

    "...people of state pension age...will not be affected by these changes".

    According to that several times repeated declaration, any pensioner notifying a change of circumstances - be that a deterioration or a miraculous cure - or indeed being reviewed in some way, would only risk losing all or part of their pip award, or qualify for an enhanced award, in keeping with the rules as they are now, because, when you take the redundant words out of Timms's sentence,

    people of state pension age will not be affected by these changes.










    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @gingin
      @gingin, it might sound a bit like that, and maybe he meant it to, but on several occasions he's committed, whether or not he meant it, to more than "you'll most probably be fine! ".

      He's given us a bit of information about current policy, followed by a conclusive assurance. The information was unnecessary and might be seen as a clumsy explanation, but if it was meant to deceive, it was disarmed by the concluding statement.

      If he wanted wriggle room, he shouldn't have sewn it up. We don't have to trust him, we just need to confront him with his own words. Pedantry is the antidote to politics!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @godgivemestrength I appreciate your analysis seems to conclude this, but I just think that the way Timms is choosing his words and not just giving a very clear and concise answer is a major red flag. To me, 'will not be affected by these changes' in the context of the preceding sentence just reads like 'chillax everyone, you'll most probably be fine!'
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 days ago
    Hi everyone. I have not commented until now as didn't feel I had anything important to add, but have been a member for several years (lifesaving guides B+W, literally) and have been reading all your comments studiously since this utterly disgraceful, lying government came to power on the back of many of our votes, mine included.

    There is a narrative building, in fact well-established already by now, that genuinely disabled folk like us are scroungers, unworthy; somehow an unnecessary drain on an already hampered system. That we are somehow less than human beings. While this idea is in and of itself appalling, and similar in ideology to certain opinions which were held in Europe in the 1930s, it also circumnavigates a point which is crucial and in my view not being emphasised enough to further our cause and stop this madness. Which is the fact that everyone who is able to work at some point in their adult lives usually does, and enters into a social contract with whichever group of politicians happens to be in power at the time. This contract states we will pay a proportion of our wages into the National Insurance system, so that we have access to healthcare whenever we might need it, and also a little help should our jobs, or other life events, make us too physically or mentally unwell to continue working for somebody else and improving their lives with our efforts.

    This is as mentioned a form of contract, and therefore the idea that we are "scroungers" is not only laughable but obscene. In any fair society, it should also imply that any young people who happen to fall ill before they are able to contribute to this said system, should be able to be effectively taken care of proportionately by those of us who have en masse paid into national insurance, until such time as they are ideally made well again by a working healthcare service and are then able to contribute, as most would wish to.

    I watched Keir Starmer's response to a quite horrendous "joke" approximately 18 months ago by then PM Rishi Sunak about a trans victim of murder, while as far as Sunak knew the victim's mother was in the gallery at the time. Starmer recoiled, as if slapped, and sat down without saying anything. When I saw that apparent level of empathy I thought in that moment that he was the ideal person to take us out of the last 14 years of apathetic grim attitude towards us displayed by the self-serving Tories.

    It seems I and many others could not have been more wrong. Never thought I'd be wishing Sunak back!

    Wishing you all love and the courage which we are undoubtedly going to need. Just please all remember, you earned this nominal help, by trying hard until for whatever reason you couldn't. In my humble opinion this is one of those historical situations which really needs fighting for, as hard as we can despite inevitable emotional and physical cost. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @The RealHenrySugar I shared with Carers UK (when we had a meeting after my campaign interview) how utterly betrayed many of you feel. I mercifully am spared the sense of betrayal in that I voted Lib Dem, but that was only a strategic choice as the contest in my area was between them and the Cons. I feel enraged though. Labour has acted in an utterly underhanded and duplicitous way. It reminds me of the Traitors series. Honestly, they've manoeuvred their way around this in exactly the same way. Public servants have forgotten their vocation. Power indeed corrupts. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @The RealHenrySugar
      The RealHenrySugar Agreed, but Starmer sat and said nothing, was my point, so was perhaps never going to be our champion. Although I believe he did subsequently condemn Sunak's comment, his behaviour has always seemed motivated by politics, rather than principles.

      I believe he's been caught out by this welfare row. After years of tailgating the trend, he's boxed himself in with no room for manoeuvre and run smack up his own rear.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @rookie It felt real at the time, really. I felt I could believe in him and that he would save us from the selfish likes of Sunak and Hunt. That Rayner was genuine to say that she has come from similar background as many of us; ie had to struggle for money while raising kids.
      Now, he is demonstrating that he is the polar opposite of someone who cares about other people. Disappointing doesn't even begin to cover this man's pure, clear betrayal. He is a disgrace.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 days ago
      @rookie The simple fact is that they are trying to penalise us for working hard and becoming ill as a result, while the people whose businesses we work for until we become ill, discard us. There is no way that these crooked people, be it businesses or government (and therefore linked to business, see Starmer) will ever work in our favour. Therefore fighting in whatever manner is the only way. X

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 days ago
      @Old Mother @Old Mother exactly. They are trying to create a scenario where we are scroungers; lazy, undeserving. We have absolutely earned the expectation of relatively small daily support (small compared to most countries in Europe) by working, usually harder than most politicians.
      In most cases for people who have bags of money and manipulate us. And yet because we have more serious things to deal with, like looking after kids for example, we accept certain wages. But continue to work regardless, and now are attacked when we become too ill from self-sacrifice to continue lining their pockets. To be thrown onto the rocks like this is beyond appalling. Truly horrendous, somehow they think they can justify it. The wave of horror by genuine Labour MPs appears to be finally building. Although perhaps sadly it is a wave of horror at the potential of losing their seats.

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

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

 
iContact