Personal independence payment (PIP) claims in England and Wales have passed four million for the first time, with four Merseyside constituencies ranking in the top 10 areas for claimants.
Claimant numbers have roughly doubled since 2019, and PIP spending is forecast to exceed £41 billion by the end of the decade. Liverpool Walton is the constituency with the highest proportion of claimants in the country.
Bootle, Birkenhead and Knowsley also appear in the top 10. A major factor behind the rise is the growing number of claims for disabling psychiatric disorders such as depression, anxiety and PTSD.
Mental health drives increase
Mental health conditions now account for nearly two in five (39%) of all claims, with numbers more than doubling over the last six years. Musculoskeletal conditions, including chronic pain syndromes like fibromyalgia and degenerative diseases like arthritis, are the second-largest category, followed by neurological conditions such as Multiple Sclerosis and Parkinson’s.
Figures from the House of Commons Library show psychiatric disorders are now the main reason for PIP payments in every parliamentary constituency in England and Wales.
Liverpool Walton has the highest proportion of PIP claimants, with nearly one in five working-age adults (19.7%) receiving the payment. More than two in five claimants there receive PIP for a psychiatric disorder.
Regional differences
Easington in the North East has the second-highest proportion of working-age claimants (18.0%), followed by Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney (17.8%). Working-age adults are far more likely to claim PIP in the North and Wales than in London and the South of England.
About one in eight working-age adults claim PIP in the North East (12.1%) and Wales (11.9%), and one in nine in the North West (10.7%). In contrast, only one in 15 claim PIP in London (6.6%) and the South East (6.7%). The average across England and Wales is around one in 12 working-age adults (8.6%).
The top 10 areas with the highest proportion of PIP claimants are Liverpool Walton, Easington, Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney, Aberafan Maesteg, Blackpool South, Knowsley, Bootle, Birkenhead, Merthyr Tydfil and Aberdare, and Rhondda and Ogmore.
Review finds system 'no longer fit for purpose'
The figures come after broadcaster Jeremy Clarkson faced a backlash for claiming young people could claim up to £194 per week “if they’ve got ants in their pants, or ADHD as it is now called, or some other head-based issue with an acronym”. His comments followed a Times report showing more than 87,000 16 and 17-year-olds claim PIP, with over two-thirds receiving the higher rate of £194 a week for mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions such as anxiety and ADHD.
Mr Clarkson suggested the payout was £100 more than working a part-time shop job, arguing claimants should be made to send a weekly “thank you” email to taxpayers. However, PIP is designed as an extra-cost benefit rather than an income replacement. It is non-means-tested, and eligibility depends on how a health condition impacts daily living and mobility, regardless of whether the claimant is employed. In many cases, the payments cover essential costs such as adapted transport, specialist equipment and personal care that enable disabled people to remain in employment.
Despite this, an independent review of disability benefits recently concluded the current system is “no longer fit for purpose”. The Timms Review found the PIP application and assessment process causes severe distress, with applicants describing a system that “breaks” them rather than encouraging independence. The review noted that onerous reassessments cause mental and physical exhaustion, forcing some disabled people to withdraw from work or social life.
Led by disability minister Sir Stephen Timms, the review was launched last year in response to backbench Labour opposition to proposed benefit cuts. A final report is due next year. In a recent interview, Prime Minister Andy Burnham said he planned to bring “substantial change” to the social care system. While committing to reduce the national welfare bill, Mr Burnham told the BBC he would not “go straight to blaming those people” who rely on support.
He said: “What I would say is that there are people in the benefits system, young people in their 20s, who have been, I would say, quite seriously let down because the support wasn’t there for them when it should have been there.” Asked whether current claimants could face reduced or removed benefits, Mr Burnham advocated making support conditional on taking up available opportunities. He added: “I think it’s a good thing that the Government has given guarantees of opportunities for young people. Where mental health support is needed, for instance, it should be provided in work to support people in an opportunity.”
