The Labour List website  has updated its list of Labour MPs who have openly said they will vote against the Pathways to Work Green Paper cuts.  There are now 27 MPs who say they will do so, up from 12 just a few days ago.

Another seven Labour MPs have expressed opposition to the cuts, but not yet said they will vote against them.

For MPs to put their heads above the parapet this long before the battle begins takes a certain amount of courage.  They will undoubtedly come under huge pressure from Labour whips to back down before a bill to change the PIP points system and cut the universal credit health element for new claims is introduced in May.

If the bill is certified as a money bill, the Lords will not be able to amend or delay it for more than a month, meaning the cuts could be on the statute book by the end of July, ready to be implemented next year.

But with 27 Labour MPs now openly rebelling and one Labour MP having started a petition against his own party’s plans, not everything is going the government’s way.

You can check if your MP is on the list here.

If they are, perhaps send them an email to offer your support for their stand. 

If not, and you haven’t already contacted them, now is the time to do so.  Getting MPs to come out against the Green Paper cuts is undoubtedly the best way of defeating them. 

There’s more on contacting your MP and many other steps you can take on our What you can do page.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Tories and Reform will just carry on the anti-disabled narrative, Labour, the Tories and Reform are no friend of disabled people.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 hours ago
      @tintack On the subject of reform, Tice is a businessman. I expect him to vote in favour (I could be wrong). It will be interesting to know how many disabled people he employs. Even more interesting to know why he thinks disabled can work when he doesn't want to employ them himself. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 hours ago
      @Anon Having two Anons is very confusing. Or it is the same Anon arguing with him/herself? Picking different names would be helpful.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 hours ago
      @Lucy
      It's not about assigning blame. I was referencing it because certain people in this comments section have the strangest idea that the Tories are fluffy bunny rabbits in comparison to Labour when there's a long history of them treating us just as badly AND they've recently gone on the record to say they would treat us harsher than Labour is now. 

      That's not to say that Labour ISN'T treating us harshly, just that the Tories desire to go even further. Which should be an automatic red flag to neither support them nor trust them either. 

      My initial argument was that bringing the Tories back into power or voting Reform will not make anything better. Both of these parties have made it abundantly clear they view us as parasites of the highest order and have no desire to support us. 

      Like I've said elsewhere in this comments section: Lib Dems and Green have both expressed that they will treat the disabled better - with the latter saying they would introduce a wealth tax if elected - so if we should vote for anybody, it should be them.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Dave Dee
      The problem with Labour inflicting such savage cuts is that it just gives the Tories licence to move even further right. Labour's cuts are even worse than those imposed by the Tories when they were in power, but now that Labour are proposing this the Tories are saying they would cut even further (they were saying something similar prior to the election but now seem to be even further emboldened). And if Labour were to say they would go as far as the Tories now say they would, the Tories would just up the ante again. As for Reform, their views on social security are positively Darwinian, so anyone voting for them thinking they would stand up for the sick and disabled would be in for a nasty shock.

      This means that all the pressure is coming from the right. The argument that we have to vote Labour to keep the Tories out looks increasingly threadbare because even if it's technically true, when Labour are this bad the choice between them and the Tories (or Reform) looks like a choice between the guillotine or a firing squad. 

      The only justification for voting Labour now is if your MP is one of those still in possession of a functioning conscience, rather than one of the right wing drones approved by Starmer, McSweeney and co.. Otherwise, the only parties who are likely to stand up for us are the Greens, the SNP, and - possibly  - the Lib Dems, though after their record as part of the coalition that certainly can't be taken for granted to say the least.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Anon
      Yes, the tories did propose the new 'health element' of UC. However, I quote from their 2023 White paper:
      "We will set the award rate of the new UC health element at the same level as is currently awarded to those people determined to have Limited Capability for Work and Work Related Activity (LCWRA)."


      So Labour's decision to strip the benefit to half the original amount is all their own. Can't blame the tories for that.

      I'd vote for the tories over Labour after this horror show. At least they were upfront about their intentions. Labour smile while sliding the knife in between your ribs.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    My Labour MP is a spineless ratbag. When I wrote to him about this he wrote back crowing about how wonderful the changes were and how great it was that the disabled were finally being given a chance to get into work.
    My reply is as follows:

    "Sir, don't you think that disabled people, autonomous beings, can decide for themselves if they are capable of work or not? If they are, they will work. If they can't work, they will not. No changes to benefits will change this fact, regardless of how you massage the media propaganda.
    PIP is not an out of work benefit. It is not means tested. I fail to see why it has been focused on so heavily to "get disabled people back to work" when many disabled people who claim PIP do work. PIP has nothing to do with work.
    I am massively disappointed in your stance on this issue which is going to push 340,000 disabled people into poverty, including many of your constituents. Many of your colleagues have the courage to stand up and vote against these barbaric changes. It's not too late for you to join them and regain the respect that you have lost from myself, my friends, neighbours and family. You have lost all of our votes otherwise. This issue is too important to stay silent on, or even worse, support.


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Lucy This letter is fantastic . Thank you for sharing, I have emailed my mp to ask his stance on this ( he's not on the list of voting against it so probably not going to vite against at the moment )
      I've had no reply from him so will email again , then send similar email to yours if he is going to support these horrendous changes. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Lucy One detail these robots ignore is that disabled people already had the facility to look for work in this system. The real unspoken rationale behind this change is that if they push people into poverty, it will force them to look for work. It is weaponising poverty to control people's behaviour. I've never seen anything so evil done by a Labour party in my life. These ghouls supporting it are not real Labour. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    We need every business that will lose out by these cuts to be banging on the doors of their MPs. The disabled pound in this country is under an onslaught and looks set to all but vanish from the economy. There are many - and many different kinds of - businesses that will suffer from the cuts, some will potentially go under. They need to wake up and start shouting, if not on our behalves, then on their own! And while we're talking about the devastating financial impact, many councils across England and Wales will rue the day they did little more than weakly object at this critical time, because the social care shitstorm and it's various plagues will soon result in a moral and financial deluge that will break some councils too. Things haven't been easy since the financial crisis of 2008, but until now the disabled pound has largely stayed in the right pockets. Once it is ripped from our hands and channeled to corporate welfare, local government will risk collapse. Things are going to get extremely ugly, it's all coming down the pipeline if these catastrophic cuts are voted through. Why can't these various bodies who'll be indirect victims of Labour's spiteful austerity measures see what's happening?! 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    "Conservatives stand ready to vote for the reforms should Labour face a significant rebellion that could defeat the legislation. While allowing Labour to be defeated would be seriously damaging for the government, Tories sees these reforms as smoothing the path to much steeper reforms in the coming years. And a large rebellion would be damaging enough, regardless of outcome, especially if Labour needs to lean on Tory voters to ram through this parliament."
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 hours ago
      @tintack The reason the Tories "care" (and I use that word lightly) so much about the winter fuel allowance is because they don't want their voter base to freeze to death. If the disabled had historically voted for the Tories, you can bet they would be just as invested in our plight as they are with the pensioners. 

      It's actually worse than hypocrisy. They're reducing human lives down to votes and political point scoring. Despicable doesn't even begin to cover it.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Just John Yesterday the Tories put out a party political broadcast about the winter fuel allowance cut and the resulting poverty and possibly deaths of many pensioners resulting from that policy. Fair enough - it's a terrible policy that may indeed have such consequences. But when the government plans to inflict much more savage cuts on the sick and disabled which will have the same consequences on an even bigger scale the Tories don't mind one bit and even complain that the cuts don't go far enough. Hypocrisy? Perish the thought.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Hightower I voted for them in the last GE because it was a battle between Lib Dems and Conservatives in my region, and even though I knew they wouldn't win I thought the Lib Dems might hold Labour to account on carer's and disabled rights. My MP's email response to me seems to affirm this, so I'm glad I did. Not that it will necessarily make any difference, but i'm so glad I didn't vote Labour. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Hightower Greens are supposedly supportive of disabled I think.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Hightower The problem is with Lib Dems is that people haven't forgotten their broken promises and the way they partook in Cameron's government. I appreciate they weren't the majority government and this was 15 years ago but considering how Labour have behaved recently, I doubt the disabled will want to put their faith in a party that has been known to go back on their promises when it suits them.

      Not disagreeing with you, they certainly seem the lesser evil party and the Greens have a very slim chance of getting in because no doubt many in this country would deem them "too woke" so they are our best chance as it stands. I just personally would not trust them unless they a) make it apparent that they will have our backs (which Labour did not do and look where that's landed us) and b) become the majority government, because anybody they decide to team up with will no doubt get their own way anyway as this is what happened with the Clegg/Cameron alliance. 

      Unless we happen to end up with a Green-Lib Dem alliance, anyway...
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Labour are worse than Conservatives.

    In less than 1 year, they have done more harm to us than 14 years of Tory rule.

    The Tories showed more compassion for disabled people over 14 years, than Labour has in 10 months.

    FACT.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Nostalgic For Tory Rule This is not true, the Tories were awful.  Labour are basically Tories now though, we need real change.  And not in the awful form of Reform, as they're just another right wing party.  Greens are my first choice, then Lib Dems.  Greens want a wealth tax, and were going to increase money for the disabled. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Anon The facts speak for themselves.

      Labour have done more harm to us in 9 months, than the Conservatives did in 14 years.

      Think about that fact.

      The point is not that the Tories are in any way good. It is that Labour are an order of magnitude worse.

      It's not about what they say. It's about what they do.

      What did Tories do?
      What is Labour doing?

      Did the Tories rush through a money bill as an Act of Parliament to subvert our legal protections? No. They didn't.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Nostalgic For Tory Rule
      I personally believe you're trolling but just in case you're not: 

      The Conservatives have been very vocal about how they feel that these reforms are "not going far enough". 

      Also, with all due respect: where were you when Universal Credit and PIP was rolled out? When the Conservatives tried to make the latter harder to get in 2016? 

      And when Sunak suggested that we should live on vouchers? 

      The Conservatives have absolutely no compassion for disabled individuals. Having a rose-tainted view of their leadership simply because their policies presumably didn't affect you or their plans were stopped by legislation/them being voted out doesn't change that. 

      That being said, you can absolutely say that Labour are as bad as they are. Mainly because Labour are towering hypocrites who have put on a front of caring about us in order to lord over the Tories and win our votes. Which is utterly unforgivable. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @A Vouchers are still better than losing everything because you 'failed' an arbitrary 4 point PIP test.

      Labour done more harm in 10 months than Tories did in 14 years.

      How many people will perish from these changes? Thousands?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Nostalgic For Tory Rule Trying way too hard. The Tories were going to swap pip for vouchers.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    While I have zero faith in this atrocious Labour Party, I do still think when the time comes, that number will be significantly higher. Whether it will be enough to make this political poison for the government remains to be seen.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    It's not anywhere near enough.  And while many more mps are against it, they won't have the guts to vote with their conscience and risk losing the whip.  

    It is bizarre that they are pushing this through so quickly when the consultation questions suggest they don't know how to implement the changes or support those affected.  Important issues like whether there will be transitional protection, which people should not be pressured into job hunting, and what happens to the work allowance if you lose health UC are all up in the air, and the first two are addressed in the consultation questions.  It's like they have come up with the cuts and not thought through how to make them work....
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Anon Absolutely spot on.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Slb It's not all that bizarre, to be honest. They're clearly rattled at how the Tory plans for the WCA (which they've pretty much implemented as their own plans in the essence that they wish for PIP to be a gateway to disability benefits as a whole) were dragged through the courts and declared "unlawful" so they're trying to leave as little time for more legal challenges as possible.

      This is probably also why they kept quiet about these plans for so long and took us for a ride. They learned from the Tories that showing your hand too soon gives those pesky advocacy groups time to mount a defence and mess up your whole proposal before it even gets off the ground.

      Obviously, more legal challenges still wouldn't stop an Act of Parliament but it may or may not have the effect of dragging things out when they want to save money as soon as possible and having MPs less willing to back it.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Slb
      They haven't thought things out at all. ESA (C) claimants abroad have the right to live abroad and claim the benefit they paid NI toward. They will be unable to claim UC from abroad. It seems no-one from Labour has actually considered this small yet vital group of people.
      I think it's disgusting that ESA (C) is also being merged with JSA under the guise of the new time limited benefit. It's yet another way of forcing a group of people off benefits = success for statistics!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    A caveat is surely the PIP 4 point rule will need to go through a consultation aka a Green Paper and White Paper before being taken to a vote. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Dave Dee The 4 point rule isn't part of the consultation.  It says that specifically in the green paper.  Yes, there will be a white paper, but there's no doubt it will go through even if the Lords and committee stage criticise it.  However, there are lots of questions regarding these decisions, and things like transitional protection for those losing out ARE in the consultation.  On the plus side, things that do get passed often get delayed - such as UC, which took much longer to implement than planned, and the Rwanda scheme that never happened.  Hopefully similar issues will plague these changes and we can all get a few years extra of the money we deserve.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Further to my earlier comment, and confirmation that as a money bill Judicial Reviews will not work, I presume that primary legislation will have to go through a committee stage. I would therefore suggest contacting all relevant chairs of disability Select Committees to see if amendments can be made. I'm afraid cuts are going to go ahead.  On a previous thread I did mention the possibility of introducing a third, lower tier, of daily living component to PIP (as was the case with DLA). I appreciate this is not a popular option but might one of the few that will be available; the alternative is hundred of thousands in destitution, with the resultant cost to local authorities who will have no choice but to hike up Council Tax (which will be very unpopular) by far more than 4.99%
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Dave Dee It appears that the change to PIP eligibility will affect those with arthritis and similar conditions far more than those with mental health issues.  I agree about a third tier, but will Labour implement something that will affect the money they are trying to save? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Matt The "middle ground" which Labour could concede is a lower third tier dealing with in their words "less severe" or "mild" disabilities revolving around their favourite political pinata, Mental Illnesses.


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    My MP is not on the list come on Ben Coleman we know you can do it! Is your MP on the list?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    There are other MPs not on the list who are against cuts think there will be more  that are keeping it to themself some MPs won't say to anyone else if they voting against they'll just do it .
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Honestly, it's nowhere near enough. Shameful. Although I respect any that do vote against, because they will be pressured, threatened and punished.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Leah Let us all do everything that we possibly can to grow that number.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Is hartlepool MP  in or out what are your thoughts.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    My MP has been critical but not out right said he would vote against, I've emailed them to add him to the maybe list. I would imagine there are a good few lesser known MPs who have done similar
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Only an immediate legal challenge can stop this, and save 340,000 disabled people from abject poverty.

    ▪Petitions will not work.
    ▪Emailing MPs will not work.
    ▪They don't care about our survival.

    Lawfare vs Lawfare.

    Disabled people are a legally protected minority, who are being discriminately targeted by this green paper.

    Everything besides actual legal action is futile.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Legal Action Now I’ve been thinking this. Numerous charities and campaign groups have spoken out etc…. which is all well and good but legal action will be our only hope. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Anon That’s true although the pressure the Gov may come under from the UN special rapporteur, ECHR etc could be intense so is worth pursuing.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Anon How many votes against are needed to block it?

      ▪First-past-the-post system = non-democratic.
      ▪Party whip system = non-democratic.
      ▪Hereditary lords = non-democratic.
      ▪Monarchy = non-democratic.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Legal Action Now The courts can't quash or amend Acts of Parliament.  They could if the changes were being introduced via Statutory Instruments, which would be the normal practice.  But Labour are willing to risk a vote in Parliament in order to make sure that Lawfare won't work. So, unfortunately, being a protected minority won't help. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    Only 27 of them?

    Oppose....

    340,000 disabled people being pushed into poverty, in one of the richest countries in the world.

    I see.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 days ago
      @Anon 27 is not enough you can see this being pushed through, this will be the end for labour for a very long time.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 days ago
    A start, but really we need at least 70 labour MP's to vote against the proposed legislation. Not surprised Race (Exeter) is not on the list.....
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.