A Review Long Overdue: Can PIP Finally Change?

A review that’s been a long time coming

This isn’t just another government announcement – it’s a rare moment of genuine significance. For the first time, disability experts have been appointed to lead a full review of Personal Independence Payment, a system that shapes daily life for millions. Their leadership signals a shift that goes far beyond policy papers or ministerial statements: it touches dignity, autonomy, and the trust disabled people have long been asked to give without seeing it returned. As this review begins, the real question is whether this moment marks meaningful change – or just another promise waiting to be broken.

Why PIP has never felt fair

PIP assessments take a real toll. Not just the forms, but the fear. The pressure to prove your own struggles. And the way the system looks for sameness when no two disabled people live the same reality. I’ve been through it, and it never felt like my needs were truly seen. Families absorb that stress too – wanting their disabled or neurodivergent child to be independent, yet carrying the weight when the system misses the nuances that shape everyday life. PIP is meant to support independence, but money alone can’t bridge the gap when capability isn’t understood, and support still depends on who shouts loudest.

What changes when disabled experts lead

What makes this moment stand out is that disabled people aren’t just being consulted – they’re finally helping to lead. The 12 members appointed to the Timms Review bring something the system has long lacked: lived expertise, not just theoretical understanding. They know how policy feels when it lands in real lives. That credibility matters. It gives this review a legitimacy PIP has never truly earned. And with people who understand disability shaping the questions, not just answering them, there’s a chance to rethink what “need”, “independence”, and “support” actually mean. It’s the first time in years that hope feels cautiously reasonable.

When eligibility doesn’t match reality

I know this complexity firsthand. I was once in receipt of Personal Independence Payment, before later being judged no longer eligible — despite many people who know me and understand my circumstances believing that I still should be. I live with poor mental health, and my experience sits in an uncomfortable grey area where need isn’t always visible, linear, or easy to evidence. It raises a difficult but necessary question: does providing a payment alone truly address the barriers people face? In cases like mine, better mental health support, stronger infrastructure, and earlier intervention could improve quality of life — and help ensure PIP is allocated to those who need it most.

Independence isn’t binary

For too long, PIP has treated independence like an on/off switch, when in reality it’s a spectrum shaped by context, support, and the infrastructure people can actually access. Some disabled and neurodivergent people will always need a certain level of help because of the nature of their conditions — and that shouldn’t be misunderstood as failure or dependency. Others live with lifelong realities like autism or dyspraxia, or with conditions that fluctuate day to day. “Can do once” never means “can do safely, consistently, or without harm”. With experts who understand this leading the review, there’s finally a chance to modernise how need is defined.

Trust, accountability, and what must not happen

There’s room for cautious optimism, but appointments alone won’t fix a system built on snapshots of “good days” and “bad days”. Reviews can help, but they can’t become the defining moment in someone’s life. Disabled and neurodivergent people shouldn’t feel pushed to treat PIP like a badge of honour, or a prize to chase. What matters is transparency, follow‑through, and support that reflects real circumstances — not assumptions. Families need clearer communication and reviewers who understand what they’re looking for, not more layers of process. And after years of rising costs, missed nuances, and broken trust, disabled people will be watching closely.

A chance to get it right – if we let it

This moment matters because lived experience is finally being treated as expertise, not an afterthought. With disabled people helping to shape the Timms Review, we have a chance to build a system that understands real lives — and designs infrastructure and support that people can actually access without financial strain. This isn’t just a policy exercise; it’s a test of who we are as a society and what dignity really means. If we get it right, trust can grow again. The question now is whether this review will reshape PIP into something fairer — or become another missed opportunity.