A recent letter from the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has cast a stark light on the UK's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill, raising serious concerns about its potential impact on disabled people's human rights. The Committee's intervention serves as a critical warning, urging the UK government to provide clarification on a range of issues that could deepen existing inequalities and violations of rights.

When I voted for change from the Conservative government in 2024, I did not for a second think 'change' meant a fast-track version of what we had experienced for 14 years. I say this because the UN had in these 14 years raised similar concerns on the practices of the previous government, explicitly finding systematic violations of the human rights of persons with disabilities. Their latest letter expresses concern that the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill will only 'deepen the signs of regression' in relation to the standards and principles enshrined in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) Bill continues to face (rightly) significant criticism, particularly concerning its proposed changes to key disability benefits. The United Nations (UN) Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, alongside various advocacy groups, has highlighted a range of profound concerns.

A primary alarm stems from the potential for the Bill's measures to push individuals into poverty. While Labour calculates that the amended bill will result in 50,000 fewer people being in poverty by 2029/30, this claim is met with contention. The critique regarding Labour's poverty calculations, including the assertion that 100,000 more children and working-age people will be forced into poverty, comes from Benefits and Work. Their analysis, titled "Labour’s poverty lie: changes will still push 100,000 into poverty," published on July 8, 2025, argues that Labour's figures are misleading. Benefits and Work contend that this is due to Labour's inclusion of 150,000 individuals who were never actually placed into poverty, as the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) changes by the previous government were planned but never enacted.

Further exacerbating the issue, the Bill is criticised for establishing a divisive two-tier welfare system. Under this system, while existing claimants may retain their current level of protection, new claimants will receive substantially less support. This disparity is widely considered morally unacceptable, creating a framework of unequal access to vital assistance. Eligibility criteria are also a major point of contention; the "severe conditions criteria" intended to protect claimants from cuts are deemed "extremely hard to meet". There are specific concerns that these criteria may fail to adequately account for fluctuating conditions, such as those experienced by individuals with Parkinson's and Multiple Sclerosis, potentially precluding them from receiving the higher rate of support4. The UN Committee has, moreover, specifically sought clarification on how these measures will disproportionately impact young persons, new disability benefit claimants, women with disabilities, individuals requiring high levels of support, and persons with psychosocial disabilities or those needing mental health care.

Transparency and process issues also feature prominently in the criticism. There appears to be a notable absence of a comprehensive impact assessment detailing the consequences of the budget cuts on disability benefits, prompting the UN Committee to explicitly request such information6. Additionally, the Bill's designation as a "Money Bill" has resulted in limited scrutiny by the House of Lords, raising concerns about the thoroughness of the legislative process. The consultation process itself has been described as deficient, with the UN Committee highlighting concerns about the extent to which disabled people and their representative organisations have been "closely consulted and actively involved" in the Bill's drafting and parliamentary progression8. Prior consultations related to the "Pathways to Work" Green Paper were also limited in scope, covering only 10 out of 22 proposed policy changes.

Broader systemic issues are also at play. While the government has discussed new employment support, the majority of the associated funding will not be available until the end of the decade. Furthermore, studies suggest that the Bill's provisions are expected to lead to only a marginal increase in employment, estimated at between 1% and 3%, casting doubt on its primary stated aim. Critics also argue that the current welfare system already subsidises employers paying low wages and landlords charging unaffordable rents. Rather than addressing these systemic roots of poverty, the Bill risks further entrenching reliance on welfare. There is also a significant risk that the Bill's changes could jeopardise the future support for nearly 800,000 disabled children as they transition into adulthood, as they would be assessed under the new, stricter criteria. Compounding these issues are concerns about public statements by politicians and authorities that portray persons with disabilities as "making profit of social benefits, making false statements to get social and disability benefits or being a burden to society", rhetoric that can fuel stigma and prejudice.

Specific changes to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) eligibility and conditionality are also introduced by the Bill, including alterations to assessment thresholds and the imposition of new conditionality and sanctions for benefit recipients. The UN Committee has explicitly questioned the measures in place to address the foreseeable risk of increasing poverty rates among persons with disabilities if these cuts are approved, indicating a lack of clear governmental reassurances on this critical matter. Fundamentally, the Bill appears to disregard previous UN Committee recommendations, including those from its 2017 Concluding Observations and 2016 Inquiry Report, which found "grave and systematic violations" of the human rights of persons with disabilities. The UN's 2024 follow-up report explicitly stated that "no significant progress has been made" and noted "signs of regression".

The UN's letter serves as a stark reminder that the UK's social security reforms must align with its international human rights obligations. As the Bill progresses, it is crucial for policymakers to genuinely engage with the serious concerns raised by disabled people and their advocates, ensuring that welfare reforms uphold, rather than undermine, the rights and dignity of all citizens.

You can read the UN Letter here.