Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Supporting Disabled People into Work

Monday 17 March 2025 · 1 question

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

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • David Williams asked about a flawed PIP assessment that lacked humanity and empathy for his constituent Christopher.
  • The Minister stated that treating people with dignity and respect is at the heart of the Government's plans.
  • The Minister mentioned experience as a constituency MP for 14 years under the Conservatives.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 David Williams Lab Stoke-on-Trent North
Context

The MP references a constituent, Christopher from Talke, who faced issues with Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment and is concerned about future welfare reforms.

Question

Christopher, a resident of Talke in my constituency, was badly let down by a flawed PIP assessment—one that lacked basic humanity and empathy. With reports of welfare reforms in the media, he is now deeply worried about what the future holds. What steps will be taken to ensure that people like Christopher are treated with fairness and dignity, and given the support that they need?

Answer from The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Liz Kendall)

I say to my hon. Friend and his constituent that treating people with dignity and respect is absolutely at the heart of this Government’s plans. Having been a constituency MP for 14 long years under the Conservatives, I know that there will always be people who cannot work because of the severity of their disability or illness, but I also meet—day in, day out—disabled people who are denied the chance to work, for many different reasons. That is what we want to put right, to ensure that the social security system is there for those who need it, and not just now but for years to come.

Partly answered

Not addressed: No specific measures were provided, only a general commitment to dignity and respect in future policies.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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