Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Benefit Reforms: Disabled People

Monday 17 March 2025 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 2 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Ministerial Questions focused on Benefit Reforms for Disabled People on 2025-03-17
  • Mr Jonathan Brash emphasized the importance of balancing employment support for disabled individuals with protecting those who are sick or vulnerable
  • Liz Jarvis raised concerns from constituents about potential cuts to benefits, including personal independent payment, affecting disabled family members

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Jonathan Brash Lab Hartlepool
Employment Benefits & Welfare
Context

The MP addresses the balance required in welfare reform to ensure that those who can work are supported while protecting those unable to work due to disability or illness.

Question

Work is good for us: it is good for our physical and mental health, and for our general wellbeing. When someone can work, it is essential that they are given all the support to do so. That said, it is also imperative that those who are sick, vulnerable or disabled are always protected. Does the Minister agree that striking the balance between supporting those who can work and protecting those who cannot work must be central to any welfare reform?

Answer from The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. That balance will be at the heart of the Green Paper that we are bringing forward. We will deliver proper employment support for disabled people, which has been taken away since 2010. We will deal with the incentives to inactivity that the current system presents. Of course, there will always be people who are unable to work through disability or ill health, and we are committed to fully supporting them too.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Liz Jarvis Lib Dem Eastleigh
Benefits & Welfare
Context

The MP mentions specific constituents who rely on disability benefits, including Laura and Debbie, expressing concerns about potential cuts.

Question

My constituents in Eastleigh who support and help to care for disabled family members are desperately concerned about any potential cuts to benefits, including personal independent payment. They include Laura, whose son is registered blind, and Debbie, who helps to care for her disabled daughter and is herself disabled. Can the Minister reassure my constituents that disability benefits for people who are unable to work will not be cut?

Answer from The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)

I am concerned about the level of anxiety and speculation that has been around over recent weeks. I am sad that that has happened and that people have been concerned, but the current welfare system is failing the very people it is supposed to help—the people it is there for. Our aim is to make the system sustainable so that it will be there for people now and in the future. When the hon. Lady sees the proposals, I think she will see how we will deliver on that commitment.

Partly answered

Not addressed: reassurance against cuts

How: Speculation, System Failure

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Debbie Abrahams Lab Oldham East and Saddleworth
Employment
Context

The MP seeks confirmation on whether there will be an analysis alongside the Green Paper to assess its impacts on poverty, employment, and health.

Question

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that there will be an analysis alongside the Green Paper on the impacts it will have on poverty, employment and health?

Answer from The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)

I can confirm to my hon. Friend that we will produce a full impact assessment in due course.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)