Liz Kendall has offered three concessions to Labour rebels unhappy about the Green Paper cuts. But will they be enough to sway a significant number of dismayed MPs?
The concessions
The Guardian reports that Kendall has offered the following to Labour rebels:
13 weeks payment of PIP for claimants who lose their award because of the 4-point rule.
The “right to work” scheme for those on health and disability benefits will be introduced at the same time as the bill.
“Non-negotiable” protections for the most vulnerable benefits recipients will be on the face of the new bill.
13 week payment
Usually, claimants who lose their award because of rule changes by the DWP might expect to receive payments for 4 weeks, after being found to be no longer eligible.
13 weeks is more “generous” but of little practical use, as few claimants will be able to apply for other benefits or secure employment in that time. As a concession, it seems ineffective.
Right to work scheme
The right to work scheme appears to be a reference to the idea outlined at para 126 of the Pathways to Work Green Paper that claimants can try work without worrying about losing benefits:
“. . . we will introduce legislation that guarantees that trying work will not be considered a relevant change of circumstance that will trigger a PIP award review or WCA reassessment. We will make these changes as soon as possible, so that they apply in the current system and as well as in the reformed system.”
It appears that this will be introduced in separate legislation to the bill imposing the 4-point PIP rule, but at the same time.
This is a move that is likely to be welcomed by most MPs. But as the government had already said they would make this change “as soon as possible” it is, at best, a very minor concession.
Protections for the most vulnerable
According to the Guardian, Kendall has said there will be “non-negotiable” protections for the most vulnerable benefits recipients on the face of the welfare reform bill, when it is published next week.
Para 42 of the Green Paper explains that:
“. . . for those receiving the new reduced UC health element after April 2026, we are proposing that those with the most severe, life-long health conditions, who have no prospect of improvement and will never be able to work, will see their incomes protected through an additional premium.[ We will also guarantee that for both new and existing claims, those in this group will not need to be reassessed in future”
(Note: the additional premium will not be payable to current claimants as they will not have their LCWRA element reduced in the same way as new claimants from April 2026). This very probably – though not definitely - means that the DWP severe conditions criteria are to be put into law.
These are guidelines already used by the DWP to reduce the need for reassessment of universal credit claimants who have been found to have limited capability for work related activity (LCWRA) and whose condition will not improve.
How the severe conditions criteria work
A clamant has to meet one of the LCWRA criteria. You can find a list of the criteria here.
In addition, all of the following criteria need to be met:
The level of function would always meet LCWRA. So, conditions that vary in severity may not meet this requirement.
It must be a lifelong condition, once diagnosed. So, conditions which might be cured by transplant/ surgery/treatments or conditions which might resolve will not meet this requirement. This should be based on currently available treatment on the NHS.
No realistic prospect of recovery of function. So, for example, a person within the first 12 months following a significant stroke may recover function during rehabilitation, and would thus probably not be eligible.
Unambiguous condition. A recognised medical diagnosis must have been made.
If a claimant meets all these criteria they will be classed as having a severe, lifelong health condition and will not be subject to reassessment.
You can find further details of the severe conditions criteria in the WCA Handbook.
However, this provision was already set out in the Green Paper and due to be introduced by April 2026, in any case. So it seems to be less of a concession and more of an earlier inclusion in the legislation than had been planned.
Money Bill
Putting this concession “on the face of the bill” may have one important effect, however. Elsewhere, we have discussed the possibility that Labour will seek to make its bill a money bill, meaning it cannot be altered by the House of Lords.
However, if the clearly non-financial severe conditions criteria are put in the bill, this would seem to make it less likely that this would be an option for Labour.
Will these concessions be enough?
None of these concessions affect the main issue that Labour rebels are unhappy about, the removal of the standard rate of the daily living component of PIP from hundreds of thousands of claimants.
So, it seems unlikely that many will be swayed by what are fairly token offers, especially as two of them were to be introduced anyway.
However, Kendall appears to have confirmed that the controversial bill will be published next week and so the first vote is likely to take place at the beginning of July, come what may. (There’s more on how the bill will progress here).
So, we won’t have long to wait before we find out.
In the meantime, it might be worth letting your MP know whether these concessions will make a significant difference to your own circumstances, because it is now all about the battle for the support of potentially rebellious MPs.
As Guardian columnist Francis Ryan pointed out: “If you see briefings like this in the coming days and maybe think “I’ve heard this before”, remember that Kendall is not trying to inform the worried public - she’s trying to woo rebellious backbencher. That’s what the next few weeks are about for ministers.”
And for claimants and campaigners too.
