
Founder of award winning @Income_Max | CEO of HumanKIND AI | Creator of #MAX š¤| STRONGER THAN THE SYSTEM podcast host with Steph
UK
Joined February 2009
- Tweets27.8K
- Following1.1K
- Followers4.6K
- Likes12.8K
Lee Healey retweeted
š£ āThis is a huge first step, but it can't be the only oneā
Our conditional scenarios work for #UKPoverty2026 shows how scrapping the two-child limit is expected to benefit 500k families from April.
But a more comprehensive plan is needed, says Lead Analyst @Sam_Tims š
Lee Healey retweeted
Is runaway welfare spending to blame for the country's fiscal challenges?
We dig into the numbers⤵ļø
Lee Healey retweeted
Please watch this from Angela Haggerty
She explains how politicians don't have any experience of using the benefit system
Then she explains how difficult it is to get benefits in detail
At the end the Reform UK person then objects, asking why there are so many more sick people
She corrects him and points out we had a pandemic which affected people in different ways
Eventually, Fiona Bruce cuts of her off
These 4.5 minutes on #BBCQT humanising the disabled, the poor, and whoever else is in receipt of benefits or support
Lee Healey retweeted
Out Today: Universal Credit Work Capability Assessment statistics, April 2019 to September 2025
These statistics cover the number of people on Universal Credit with a health condition or disability restricting their ability to work bit.ly/3MDbhHs
Lee Healey retweeted
Out Today: ESA: outcomes of Work Capability Assessments including mandatory reconsiderations and appeals: December 2025 bit.ly/4pYlCMv
Lee Healey retweeted
Here we go again - independence for disabled people is too much of a cost clearlyā¦
EXCLUSIVE from @Smyth_Chris
Rachel Reeves is preparing to save more than a billion pounds by targeting disabled peopleās capacity to get cars through the benefits system
Tax breaks worth about £1 billion a year are set to be scrapped in the budget, dramatically reducing an exemption by which cars leased under the scheme do not have to pay VAT or insurance premium tax
In another change being considered, BMWs, Mercedes and other luxury cars could be removed from a scheme that provides such premium brands to more than 40,000 benefits claimants
Reeves is said to be less likely to go further next month and restrict which benefits recipients are eligible for free cars. But such moves are being examined as part of longer-term reforms to reduce incentives to claim, and deal with mounting criticism of the scheme
thetimes.com/uk/politics/artā¦
Lee Healey retweeted
There is no need for a moral panic about the UK's welfare system.
Far from perfect but recent discourse is nuts
Spending is controlled
Lee Healey retweeted
Honoured to be appointed today as Secretary of State for Work and Pensions.
Help for those who need it. Getting people into work. Security for pensioners. And increasing skills and opportunity. š¹
Lee Healey retweeted
NEW: Is the internet changing our personalities for the worse?
Conscientiousness and extroversion are down, neuroticism up, with young adults leading the charge.
This is a really consequential shift, and thereās a lot going on here, so letās get into the weeds š§µ
Lee Healey retweeted
Privatisation has turned our essential resource into a cash-cow for profiteers.
The Governmentās long-awaited reform wonāt fix it.
If you think everyone should have access to clean, accessible, public water, add your name: actionnetwork.org/forms/wateā¦
Lee Healey retweeted
Earlier today, Richard Hughes, chair of the OBR, got to the heart of a significant problem with British politics, which is that politicians donāt feel able to be honest about what is achievable.
āThe UK public finances are in an unsustainable position in the long run. The UK cannot afford the array of promises that it has made to the public,ā he said.
We have an ageing population and a creaking public realm, plus the climate crisis. Yet despite these long-term challenges, for too long people have been led to believe they can have it all.
Lee Healey retweeted
āBut hereās where it gets interesting.
What if BOTH viewpoints - on disabled & sick people being OK and having enough to live on - and work being enough to live on - are RIGHT?
Someone working should be able to live⦠& so should someone with a disability or health issue.ā
⤵ļø
āJobless better off on sickness benefits,ā scream the headlines this morning. It was inevitable that the next chapter of the sickness and disability benefits debate would move in this direction. It deserves a proper response and Iāll try to provide it in the most balanced way possible, whilst also trying to get into the detail.
Let me start by saying that weāre in the middle of one of the most complex and challenging times Iāve ever seen UK society go through.
Post-pandemic⦠high cost of living⦠poorer health⦠NHS stretched to the limit⦠a stuttering economy thatās not quite sure of itself in a modern world stricken by consumist and environmental/climate concerns⦠wealth inequality⦠a housing crisis⦠educational failure for millions⦠AI and technology⦠a lack of adequate investment (and vision) by successive Governments including a period of deep austerity⦠global instability⦠run-down high streets⦠millions in debt⦠millions of people in poverty... millions of people in arrears with rent, energy, water, council tax⦠councils on the brink of bankruptcy⦠prisons are full and failingā¦
In short. Itās bleak. And deeply worrying for the future of UK society.
You can feel it, everywhere. You know, I know it. Thereās uncertainty, thereās anger, and thereās not a lot of hope.
āBut Lee,ā I hear you ask. āWhat has this got to do with sickness and disability benefits?ā
EVERYTHING. Itās got everything to do with it.
Let me explain why. You can never ever look at the social security system without understanding how society is structured. How itās SUPPOSED to function. What those āunspokenā values and rules are. Society in the UK has always been based on the idea of self-sufficiency through WORK and PENSIONS.
Thereās even a clue in the name of the Government department. āWork and Pensionsā is not just a catchy political name. It actually explains how our society is structured, how weāre supposed to look after ourselves and our families, once we become adults.
So if weāre supposed to look after ourselves through work and pensions - whatās the point of our social security system?
Well, itās our societal āsafety net.ā Life doesnāt quite work out perfectly for everyone. In fact, as humans we can be vulnerable to A LOT.
Our skills and abilities vary. We have disabilities. We get sick. We get unlucky sometimes with our jobs, being made redundant or getting the sack if we donāt perform. We have to care for a loved one. We start a family. We raise kids. We might divorce or separate. Our partner might die. We reach retirement without enough retirement provision. We might suffer an industrial injury or illness.
Itās pretty clear then that life doesnāt always run smooth. We need a safety net - an INCOME safety net - for people vulnerable to lifeās ups & downs. Thatās what our social security system provides.
You see, you canāt just look at the headlines this morning without understanding the system AND how weāre supposed to look after ourselves.
This is why we need to do better than just shout headlines that inflame and distract.
Itās a deeply complex set of problems that requires the deepest understanding of where weāre at as a society.
Itās not a new phenomenon that if a disabled or sick person gets EVERYTHING they are entitled to - like UC with the correct health element and housing costs, PIP, council tax support, a blue badge, NHS costs support etc etc⦠that they will have enough money to live on. Itās not even a headline really.
In fact thatās what Iāve spent my entire thirty year career fighting for - as a DWP decision maker at age 19, to a nearly 50 year old Founder and CEO of IncomeMax who now has an army of kind-hearted advisers and super smart AI helping the UKās most vulnerable people claim everything they are eligible for.
Thatās a GOOD THING. When someone is disabled or sick I want them to BE OK.
I donāt want to see anyone living in poverty, struggling or poor. I donāt want to see anyone cold, hungry, or in debt or living a miserable life.
Every single person Iāve ever helped - or that my team has helped - has been genuinely disabled or sick and in need of financial assistance. In fact, so much of my working life has been spent helping disabled and sick people challenge terrible decisions, or appeal against a system that can leave people without the help they need.
Disability and sickness is a DRIVER OF POVERTY. It always has been and probably always will be.
So now letās get into the argument. āYouāre better off being sick or disabled than working.ā
Here we meet the age old problem. The root of the āscroungers/skivers narrative.ā The headline grabbing, anger inducing, emotion laden narrative which pits humans against humans.
āWork is supposed to pay.ā āYou shouldnāt be better off not working.ā Itās a feeling very few people in UK society would disagree with, and one that makes total sense from a perspective of fairness, responsibility and self-sufficiency.
But hereās where it gets interesting. What if BOTH viewpoints - on disabled and sick people being OK and having enough to live on - and work being enough to live on - are RIGHT?
Someone working should be able to live⦠and so should someone with a disability or health issue.
Why would we want ANY HUMAN not to be OK?
Politics always takes us back here though - dividing lines and divisive rhetoric - human against human, right vs wrong,
Itās both infuriating and endlessly frustrating.
Itās like politicians canāt and wonāt dare to look at the bigger picture. Or perhaps they do, but they donāt dare to want to admit their own failings.
It doesnāt have to be like this. With love and kindness thereās a better way. But it takes bravery and courage to take this approach. It means not thinking in terms of right, left or centre. It means seeing things AS THEY ARE. And what MIGHT ACTUALLY BE POSSIBLE.
We need a new vision for UK society. One grounded in reality. And LOVE.
Thereās room for us all as humans. Thereās room for us all to thrive. To have purpose. To have enough to live on. To work, volunteer, care, study, work on ourselves, care for our health. To be OK.
The first step is to agree that we all have the right to BE OK. Everything can be worked out from there.
Lee Healey retweeted
Thereās a persistent myth that our government is somehow at the mercy of the financial markets and that it has to dance to their tune. This is most definitely doing the rounds this week, mainly as a result of Labour's mismanagement of its own party, and Rachel Reeves' subsequent very public tears.
Itās a myth I have been challenging for years, so let me summarise why.
1. The government creates the money
The UK government is the monopoly issuer of the pound. It spends all of that money into existence. Every pound of government spending creates a matching financial asset for someone else. It is only afterwards that the government issues bonds, not because it needs the money, but to provide a safe place for savers to deposit their funds when banks cannot provide this service.
This point is critical. The government does not need the markets to āfundā its spending. It is simply swapping one form of money (reserves) for another (gilts). Bizarrely, it pays interest to those to whom it provides this service.
2. Gilts are a choice, not a necessity
The sale of government bonds, gilts in the UK, is presented as if the government is dependent on the markets to keep spending. This is nonsense. The government issues gilts largely because:
It wants to drain reserves from the banking system to help the Bank of England hit its (currently too high) interest rate target.
It wants to give pension funds and insurance companies a safe deposit facility to underpin their promises to those who use their services.
It believes it must maintain an outdated and now unnecessary City-based financial architecture.
None of this means it needs the markets to spend. If no one bought gilts, the government could continue to spend. In fact, as quantitative easing and now quantitative tightening prove, there is no relationship between bond issues and Bank of England market interventions and the capacity of the government to spend: the evidence is all there for anyone to see.
3. The central bank is always the buyer of last resort
When financial markets are in turmoil, as happened in the mini-budget fiasco under Liz Truss,Ā the Bank of England steps in. Its role is to stabilise prices and yields. This is not optional. It is a fundamental part of having a sovereign currency and a central bank that acts as the lender of last resort. This means the financial markets are, in fact, dependent on the government and its central bank. Not the other way around.
4. Interest rates are a policy choice
People say, ābut the markets set interest rates, and so they can discipline the government.ā Again, this misunderstands monetary operations. The Bank of England sets the base rate. It can cap or control longer-term rates by buying or selling bonds as it chooses. The so-called market rates are policy-contingent. When push comes to shove, the central bank can always enforce the interest rate it wants.
5. What markets really influence is ideology
So why the obsession with āmarket confidenceā? The reality is, politicians and economists often invoke markets to justify austerity. It is easier to say āthe markets demand itā than to admit their own ideological choice, which would otherwise be unpalatable to the electorate. Financial markets do, in that case, play a political role, but they do not hold the government hostage. They operate within the monetary framework that the government and its central bank set. We could just as easily choose to run the economy with other priorities, but it does not suit neoliberal politicians to do so. That is because they view politics as the City does, at cost to us all.
Summary
I keep returning to this issue because it is so fundamental: the UK government is a currency creator, not a currency user. It is not like a household. It does not need to beg or borrow from the markets to spend. Financial markets are accommodated by the government, not the other way around.
Understanding this changes everything. It means that economic policy decisions ā on public services, investment, climate action, and inequality ā are political choices, not technical constraints imposed by bond traders. That is why misinformation on this issue matters so much, and the fact that it is so widespread shows just how strong are the forces that wish to deny that democratic choices can still be made in the UK.
Lee Healey retweeted
We will deliver new Neighbourhood Health Centres across the country to bring care closer to home.
Diagnostics, mental health, post-op, rehab, and nursing will all be under one roof.
Our Plan for Change is rebuilding the NHS so itās fit for the future.
Lee Healey retweeted
I wouldn't ever want to be Chancellor for all the money in the world. Incredibly tough job. Impossible ask. Especially over the last decade.
How do you try to piece together the mis-shapen, independent jigsaw pieces of consumer issues, business, the economy, bond markets, stock markets, job markets, world economies, tariffs, and more.
People often lambast Chancellors as 'unqualified' but no one is qualified to do such a broad job. Ultimately it is a political role for someone with hopefully some understanding of wider economic, financial and consumer issues.
We have to give some respect to those who try, even if we disagree with their decisions. As no one will ever get it all right.
Lee Healey retweeted
Cuts to Universal Credit for ill & disabled people that remain in this bill will be deeply harmful, but campaigners & MPs have forced a climbdown on huge swathes of the cuts that were originally proposed. You cannot deliver principled reform to a predetermined savings target
Lee Healey retweeted
Wellā¦this whole thing could have been avoided if Government consulted properly in the first place. Months of uncertainty and proposals that will make people poorer, only for government to pull and say they will consult. A huge cut to UC health remains so still work to do
Lee Healey retweeted
(1/2) With a heavy heart, I have written to the Prime Minister to tender my resignation as a whip.
Whilst I will continue to support the government in delivering the change the country so desperately needs, I cannot vote in favour of the proposed reforms to disability benefits.
Lee Healey retweeted
Weāre told these welfare cuts are the start of āreformā
But what kind of reform starts by taking billions from those already struggling?
If this is the plan - to balance the books by shredding an already ragged safety net - I wonāt back it
Real reform uplifts. It doesnāt punch-down



























