The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has come under fire from a prominent thinktank for its plans to cut disability and sickness benefits, with calls for a reevaluation of eligibility criteria rather than further restrictions. The think tank also poured scorn on the claims Labour has made around ‘savings’ from the cuts – saying they are not as much as the government is making out they are.
The DWP under fire from the Resolution Foundation
The Resolution Foundation has warned that reducing access to DWP disability benefits should not be the primary focus of government cuts. The organisation emphasises that any attempts to tighten eligibility could lead to devastating financial consequences for those already relying on these vital supports.
In a landscape where welfare cuts often hit the most vulnerable, the Resolution Foundation highlights the stark reality faced by people with disabilities and health issues. They argue that freezing benefits as a method to curb government spending would only yield savings of approximately £1 billion annually by the end of the parliamentary term, a negligible amount compared to the hardships that would be bestowed upon claimants.
This is also less than the Labour Party is claiming its cuts will save.
The thinktank firmly contends that the government’s focus should be on improving the way these benefits are managed rather than on denying support to those in need.
They highlight that the DWP should not pursue eligibility restrictions that would place undue financial strain on a small group of already vulnerable individuals. In past attempts, the government proposed crucial changes to the Universal Credit Work Capability Assessment in Autumn 2023, seeking to slash benefit spending.
However, these proposals were deemed unlawful earlier this year, illustrating the pitfalls of implementing hasty reforms without adequately considering their ramifications.
The Resolution Foundation’s report delves into the severe financial repercussions faced by individuals who suddenly find themselves ineligible for incapacity benefits.
Real-world effects
These changes aren’t merely bureaucratic – they can result in disastrous monthly income drops. For example, a single adult reliant on health-related support could see their income plummet from £810 a month to a mere £393 if eligibility were to be tightened.
The report suggests that the DWP should take decisive action to bridge this alarming gap. By redistributing levels of health-related support into basic awards, it could alleviate some of the burdens placed on individuals with disabilities.
The call for officials to temporarily freeze health-related support benefits between 2025 and 2029 could, according to the thinktank, be a way to mitigate the stark financial disparities without severely impacting claimants in the immediate term.
The inefficacies in the current system reveal a pressing need for reform grounded in compassion and understanding rather than in austerity measures that disproportionately affect those in greatest need.
As the DWP grapples with fiscal policies that critics argue are both flawed and counterproductive, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has also weighed in, labelling the current fiscal structure of the UK as needing significant improvement. They contend that the existing framework exposes fiscal policy to global economic shifts, complicating the chancellor’s promises of stable, predictable fiscal changes.
Will the DWP listen?
In this environment of uncertainty, bearing the brunt of financial pressure will be the very individuals the DWP system is designed to protect—disabled people, non-working people, and those unable to work due to sickness.
With the looming threat of tighter eligibility, cuts, and the freezing benefits, one can only hope that influential bodies like the Resolution Foundation will succeed in ensuring that the voices of those most affected are heard loud and clear. Although that seems a long way off at present.
Featured image via the Canary













Let’s not forget what may well be the real motivation behind the proposed cuts; if state provision of social security can be done away with, it opens up a multibillion£ private insurance market, & the politicians who help bring that about can look forward to being very well rewarded. So will the owners of the media too from all the extra advertising revenue this will bring in. Simple greed is the problem here, not lack of money, as we’re repeatedly reminded by the casual manner govts conjure it seemingly from nowhere when they really want to.
Regarding the idea of savings… nothing we spend as a nation costs us in the same way you or a business spending it would incur cost. If you or I spend a fiver, we then have a fiver less to spend. Not so with a national economy though. The Bank of England creates money by pressing on keyboards and pressing enter. The money created bounces around in the banking system till it ends up in the intended account. There’s nothing physically to stop the bank repeating the process.
What would stop it would be if the economy were working at full throttle, with all productive capacity employed. Then carrying on creating money would be inflationary. Be some time before we have to worry about that at the moment though.
So if the govt spends a fiver, unlike you or me or a business, it doesn’t have to go out and earn another fiver from somewhere before it can spend it again. It can just order the BoE to create it.
The idea of cost, then, doesn’t apply to the national economy in the same way it would to yours, dear reader, or mine.
Neither does savings. The DWP are talking obvious nonsense, and for one explanation why they might be doing this, see my other reply.