2025-03-18 16:37:59

A vision for change, but reality tells a different story

CEO Steve Veevers on proposed benefits reform

Today’s announcements set out a bold vision for reforming the benefits system, and we welcome the government’s commitment to removing barriers to work. At Hft, we have long championed the fact that learning disabled people want to work and are capable of doing so when given fair opportunities. Too often, the focus is on whether disabled people should work, rather than on the real barriers preventing them from doing so.

However, there is a difference between vision and reality, and that difference is critical. While this government is pledging to improve employment opportunities, we must acknowledge that anti-discrimination laws and workplace policies already exist. The Equality Act 2010 requires employers to provide reasonable adjustments for disabled employees, and Access to Work is designed to help disabled people overcome workplace barriers. Yet despite these safeguards, the employment gap remains vast.

• Only 26.7% of learning disabled people are in paid work, compared to 80% of non-disabled people.

• Disabled people are twice as likely to experience financial hardship as non-disabled people.

• Half of all learning disabled people already live in poverty.

These figures show that legal protections alone are not enough. Many employers still fail to provide reasonable adjustments, accessible workplaces, or flexible working options. Others overlook the benefits of hiring disabled employees, refusing to invest in inclusive recruitment strategies or workplace support. If anti-discrimination policies alone were enough to fix the problem, these numbers would be very different.

Social care is essential to employment

One major piece of the puzzle that is often overlooked is the role of social care in employment success. Hft, alongside other organisations, runs programs that actively place learning disabled people into meaningful employment. These programs provide tailored support, helping individuals build confidence, develop skills, and transition into long-term work. When social care is properly funded, these employment pathways become stronger, leading to lasting integration into the workforce.

However, the reality is that essential programs like these are often the first to be cut when funding is stretched. Our Sector Pulse Check report consistently highlights how providers are forced to scale back vital services such as employment support, community connection programs, and skills development initiatives due to chronic underfunding. These services are not luxuries—they are the missing link between disabled people and the workforce. If the government is serious about getting more disabled people into work, it must invest in the services that make this possible. Cutting financial support without strengthening employment pathways is not reform, it is a rollback of opportunity.

The slippery slope of ‘not bad enough’

One of the most concerning aspects of this reform is the emerging language around which disabilities and conditions are deemed “severe enough” to warrant support. We have already seen suggestions that certain mental illnesses, such as depression, may not be considered serious enough for long-term financial assistance. This is a dangerous and reductive way to determine eligibility.

• 54% of people with a learning disability also have a mental health condition.

• People with psychiatric conditions are 2.4 times more likely to lose PIP than those with physical impairments.

Mental health conditions, learning disabilities, and physical impairments all present unique and complex challenges that cannot be measured by a single diagnosis. Many disabilities are invisible, but that does not make them any less disabling. Some conditions fluctuate, meaning a person may be able to work one day but completely unable the next. These nuances must be considered, yet blanket statements that certain conditions “aren’t bad enough” set a worrying precedent.

If depression is now being questioned as “not severe enough,” what happens next? What other conditions will be deprioritised? Autism, ADHD, anxiety disorders, chronic fatigue syndrome? Once we begin categorising disabilities as “not bad enough,” we open the door to a future where thousands of disabled people are dismissed and denied the support they need.

This also raises serious concerns about who decides what is “bad enough.” In the past, we have seen worrying reports that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was given targets to reduce the number of people receiving PIP. If assessments are influenced by quotas or pressures to deny claims, then we risk stripping away support from people who need it the most. There must be strong checks and balances to ensure that decisions are made fairly and transparently. The priority must be ensuring that those who genuinely need support can access it, not creating a system designed to restrict access as much as possible.

Poverty and the risk of people falling through the cracks

A shift toward prevention and early intervention is positive in principle. We fully support the idea that people should receive help before they reach crisis point. However, we must ask what happens to those who are already in crisis. If eligibility criteria for financial support become stricter, how many people will fall through the cracks?

• 700,000 households could be pushed into financial hardship by PIP cuts.

If a person loses access to PIP or Universal Credit, will they still be able to afford the basics such as housing, food, transport, and healthcare? Will they still be able to access social care? If we design a system that prioritises prevention over immediate support, we risk leaving behind the very people these reforms claim to help.

Real reform requires action and ambition

We urge the government to turn vision into reality by ensuring that reform does more than reshape benefits. It must reshape the way society includes and values disabled people. Employers must be held accountable for inclusive recruitment and retention practices, and disability inclusion policies must be enforced, not just encouraged. Financial support must remain available for those who need it, without unfair restrictions. Work capability assessments must consider the full complexity of someone’s disability rather than rely on blanket assumptions about which conditions are “severe enough.”

Social care and employment support programs must also be properly funded to ensure that disabled people are not just given jobs, but supported to succeed in them. Hft will continue to push for a system that removes barriers, supports independence, and ensures that disabled people are given fair opportunities, not forced into hardship.

A better future is possible, but only if we confront the reality, not just the vision.

Steve Veevers

Chief Executive Officer

Hft

Notes to editors

For further information please email media.enquiries@hft.org.uk

About Hft

Proudly established in 1962 by a group of visionary parents, Hft is a charity supporting more than 2,500 learning disabled adults in England and Wales. Together, we are creating a future where learning disabled people and their families can live the best life possible.

Providing personalised support. Creating solutions for living independently. Coming together to campaign for positive change. Fundraising for new opportunities and a bigger impact.

In 2033, we’ll live in a world where learning disabled people have greater choice. About where they live. The support they need and want. And how to spend their time and money.

Learning disability versus difficulty

A learning disability is different from a learning difficulty but the terms are often confused and used inter-changeably. A learning difficulty does not affect general intellect, whereas a learning disability is a life-long condition characterised by a reduced intellectual ability and struggle with everyday activities.

–

For more information about Hft please visit www.hft.org.uk