The Conservative Party plans to review which conditions qualify for Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) benefits if they return to power. Kemi Badenoch, a key party figure, pointed to an “age of diagnosis” of low-level mental health issues such as ADHD, which she says is making the benefits system too costly.
The party has initiated a policy review aimed at reducing the scope and expense of the benefits system. Badenoch indicated that some benefits payments might become time-limited. She explained that the review will focus on determining “at what stage support should come in, and how long it should last.”
Speaking at an event in central London, Badenoch said that, as part of the party’s “campaign to get Britain working again," she and three other frontbench members would examine “the most challenging and complicated aspect of work and welfare in this country” next year.
READ MORE: Millions Face Universal Credit Cuts of Up to £624 Annually Due to DWP Deductions
READ MORE: Universal Credit Recipients Face Tough Choice: Engage with New Jobs Scheme or Risk Benefit Cuts
She emphasized the scale of the issue, explaining, “our sickness benefit system was not designed to handle the age of diagnosis which we now live in.”
Badenoch said the government will reassess which conditions are classified as disabilities for benefits purposes. “All of us will have physical and mental challenges at some point in our lives, but in an age in which one in four people now self-report as disabled, it’s clear that we need to draw a line on what health issues the state can support.”
She also criticized current poverty measures, stating, “That is not a measure of poverty at all. It is a bad measure, because in a booming economy, as incomes rise, more people can be classed as being in poverty, even though their real income is rising. We need something better. I have long said that Britain is at risk of becoming a welfare state with an economy attached.”
Addressing attitudes toward work, Badenoch suggested that many people reject jobs “because they think that those jobs are beneath them.” She defended her candid language, noting, “We spend a lot of time trying so hard not to upset people, or say anything that might ruffle any feathers, that we end up creating a system that is unworkable. I won’t apologise for the language I use. I’m actually very careful with my language, but I use language that’s going to cut through.”