Government Disability Benefit Cuts May Increase Local Authority and NHS Costs
Proposed reductions in disability benefits could burden councils and the NHS with significant additional expenses.
The UK government's proposal to cut at least £5 billion from disability benefits could result in substantial additional costs for local councils and the National Health Service (NHS), according to local government officials and advocacy groups.
The recent green paper released by Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall outlines potential changes that could render up to 1.2 million individuals ineligible for the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) by the year 2029/30. These changes may affect existing claimants, leading to the loss of benefits during reassessments.
Critics of the proposed cuts highlight that the reduction or elimination of PIP support could lead to worsening physical or mental health conditions for affected individuals.
This could subsequently increase reliance on council-funded care services.
Furthermore, family members serving as unpaid carers may lose access to carer’s allowance benefits, potentially necessitating their transfer of care responsibilities to local authorities.
An analysis conducted by the Disability Policy Centre projects that the anticipated cuts could generate an additional £1.2 billion in costs for NHS and social care services.
Arun Veerappan, the interim director of research at the Disability Policy Centre, noted that for every pound lost in benefits, councils might need to expend around £1.50 to address resultant shortfalls.
He addressed concerns about the adequacy of resources available to meet increased demand for social care support, emphasizing that funding and administrative challenges would exacerbate difficulties in sourcing appropriate care providers.
The targeted cuts are expected to affect individuals whose PIP claims involve a range of disabilities or illnesses, rather than narrowly defined severe conditions.
Often, the 'daily living' or 'care' elements of PIP payments are utilized by councils to subsidize their care services.
A reduction in these payments would place an increased financial burden on local governments.
David Fothergill, chair of the Local Government Association’s community wellbeing board, remarked that a decrease in PIP payments might lead to lower individual financial contributions to care, consequently increasing the financial responsibility of local councils.
The Local Government Association is currently exploring the potential impact of welfare reforms on the adult social care charging system.
Jon Abrams from Inclusion London, an organization representing disabled individuals, argued that the proposed changes would disproportionately affect disabled people reliant on social care.
He described the government's approach as detrimental, suggesting that it exacerbates the existing challenges faced by the social care system while potentially increasing long-term costs for local authorities and NHS services.
Concerns have also been raised that the proposed measures may compel many disabled individuals and their caregivers to withdraw from accessing necessary care services, thereby exerting additional pressure on the broader health system.
In response, a spokesperson for the Department for Work and Pensions stated that the current social security system is inadequate and has committed to implementing a £1 billion support package aimed at helping disabled individuals secure employment and overcome barriers to work.
The spokesperson stressed the government's dedication to maintaining assistance for individuals with severe health conditions and indicated plans to introduce a new premium for those unable to work.
Official costings approved by the Office for Budget Responsibility are expected to be disclosed this week.