Labour ministers have resorted to online scam techniques to try to force their PIP and UC cuts through the Commons on Tuesday. And there’s a strong chance that their dubious promise to exempt current claimants from the cuts is, in reality, only a two year reprieve.

But its not too late to for you to try to stop them, as one MP has confirmed.

Blank cheque

Ordinarily MPs would know what they were agreeing to when a bill is presented for its first vote. 

And if they do vote in favour, there is then a committee stage at which a group of MPs look at possible amendments, consult with experts - -such as disability groups in this case – before presenting amendments to be considered by the whole House. 

This process usually takes weeks or, for a bill that will affect millions of people like this one, even months.

There is then a final vote on the amended bill, at what is called the third reading.  But it’s incredibly rare for the government to lose at this stage – the last time it happened was 48 years ago

After the final vote, the bill goes to the Lords, to be carefully scrutinised again.

But in the case of Tuesday’s bill, MPs won’t actually know what they are voting for. 

Because ministers have promised there will be amendments which will exempt all current claimants, but they probably won’t even have been published by Tuesday.

MPs will just have to trust ministers who say that what they are actually voting for – the 4 point rule applying to all claimants – is not what will really happen.

Chaotic few hours

And then, a week after Tuesday’s vote, the entire months long committee stage will be shrunk into a few chaotic hours in front of the whole house, voting on amendments they have barely seen and with no chance to get advice from experts.

And, what is more, the government have applied to have the bill certified as a money bill.  If the Speaker agrees, then the Lords will have no power to change any of it.  Even if they do try, it will automatically be passed without change after one month.

Online scammers

Isn’t this exactly how online scammers work? 

Promise to save you from losing all your money as long as you hand over your account details immediately.  Quickly, quickly.  No time to talk to anyone, don’t hang up the phone, do it now or it will be too late. You’ll lose everything.

And yet, in reality even if the PIP cuts are put into law this month, they don’t actually take effect until November 2026. That’s sixteen months from now.

So, why can’t they be properly discussed and put into a separate piece of legislation next year?

Unless Labour have things to hide.

Labour’s dodgy promise

Labour’s promise to exempt all current claimants from the PIP and UC cuts may not be all it seems.

Kendall’s letter says that in relation to PIP, “The new eligibility requirements will be implemented from November 2026 for new claims only.”

But she says nothing about what happens in 2028, when disability minister Stephen Timms has finished rewriting the PIP eligibility criteria and the new rules are put into law. 

Labour says the new PIP rules will be coproduced with disability organisations.  But who honestly believes those groups will be given a veto on anything, especially with the government determined to cut costs?

So, if Timms decides that the four-point rule is a good one and should stay, then under the terms of Kendall’s letter, it will apply to current claimants from 2028.

Kendall also says “we will adjust the pathway of universal credit payment rates to make sure all existing recipients of the UC health element . . .  have their incomes fully protected in real terms.”

But she doesn’t say what will happen in 2028, when the work capability assessment is abolished and only claimants with an award of PIP daily living component are eligible for the UC health element. 

If current claimants are not exempt from this change as well, then 600,000 who don’t get PIP daily living will no longer have their income protected.  And if the PIP four point rule is also incorporated in the new PIP assessment from 2028, then hundreds of thousands more current claimants who don’t get four points, will lose their health element when they lose their PIP.

Contacting your MP will make a difference

Now, none of this may be what ministers intend.  But MPs voting on Tuesday won’t have a clue what they do intend, because the whole process has become a chaotic shambles – in spite of the fact it has the power to plunge hundreds of thousands of disabled people into poverty.

So, please consider contacting your MP and asking them to vote for a planned Labour amendment – which, ironically none of us has seen yet – which will give MPs more time to consider the cuts.  And if that fails, then vote against the bill in its entirety.

You won’t be wasting your time.  There are still rumoured to be 50 or 60 determined Labour rebels, with many more unsure what to do.

And, as one MP told the BBC yesterday,

"it shouldn't be underestimated the potential effect of a weekend of emails from constituents, constituency surgeries etc".

Let yours be one of them.

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.
    · 1 hours ago
    I've asked my MP to still vote against these immoral and indefensible cuts 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 hours ago
    The papers are reporting that Reeves is going to freeze income tax thresholds next year to fund the U turn on reducing disability benefits eligibility for existing recipients. So blatantly telling workers you are going to have to pay higher taxes to fund the far too many people claiming they cannot work when they could do some work. Reeves will no doubt latter express surprise and shock as disability hate crime continues to rise. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 2 hours ago
    The politicians spout lies about spiralling cost, people taking the mickey with vast numbers claiming to be incapable of work when there is nothing really wrong with them or they could do some work, and overly easy to claim overly generous benefits letting people get money for nothing. And the media not only does not call out and challenge the lies it promotes the lies as truth. We have had decades of TV, radio, newspapers and social media spreading anti people on welfare including those on disability benefits narratives. Portraying fraud as endemic, and the "genuine" as lazy feckless undesirable maligners, and the "real genuine" as getting overly generous support and being an unaffordable burden. To the point all three political parties highest in the polls and the public in general accept it as a moral good to reduce eligibility for disability benefits, reduce the amount paid to the disabled, and to increase conditionality and sanctions on the disabled. As to be disabled is to choose to engage in a aberrant lifestyle choice. And disability hate crime rises year on year. Meanwhile assisted dying is sold as a moral good and if legalized the UK will undoubtedly follow the path of other nations and rapidly expand eligibility for assisted dying to the non terminally ill disabled. The narrative our politicians and media spread and our direction of travel as a nation is dire. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 3 hours ago
    Nadia Whittome, MP

    These points still stand -
    -    No formal consultation with disabled people
    -    No government impact statement
    -    No OBR analysis

    Less than 24 hours for MPs to decide – and they may need to vote on the basis verbal promises.

    https://www.instagram.com/reel/DLcY9YJio6M/
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 4 hours ago
    When I look at the Pathways to Work green paper it is not just the loss of money that makes me fear for people it is people becoming subject to the conditionality and sanctions regimes.

    PIP is exempt from sanctioning, and for income replacement benefits ESA/ UC disability/health premiums are exempt. And being in receipt of the disability/health premiums results in no or less conditionality.

    The changes to PIP and UC health eligibility will result in vast numbers of disabled people who would have been eligible for PIP and ESA/UC disability/health premiums not being eligible. And for those eligible for UC health/LCWRA the government is planning at increasing conditionality and sanctions at first only support conversation but latter expanding conditionality if too few people take up the advice and help towards and into work.

    As vast numbers of ill and disabled people become subject to conditional and sanctions looking at the condition insight reports for medical conditions used by the DWP subcontractors does not inspire confidence. In the likely competence of the DWP in deciding what activities to mandate and if to sanction people for non compliance.

    The current UC conditionality and sanctions regime is terrifying. Conditionality can include actively looking for work 35 hours a week, attending the job centre daily, non time limited unpaid work placements. For repeat offenders sanctions can be up to 182 days long and for first time offenses sanctions can be open ended until the claimant complies. Those sanctioned can be not eligible for hardship payments until they comply. Hardship payments have to be applied for and are are loan. And it was proposed but I do not know if it has been implemented that those sanctioned for more than 6 months could have their benefit claim closed. Losing their housing element and edibility for hardship payments, and all passported eligibility like free prescriptions and refunds of NHS hospital travel costs.

    And unless things have changed recently when the DWP looks at its own implementation of its conditionality and sanctions regimes. It finds it often sanctions people for non sanctionable things, fails to follow procedure as far warnings before sanctioning, fails to follow safeguarding procedures before recommending sanctions, fails to supply the decision maker with the reason the claimant gives for non compliance. And disproportionately sanctions disabled people especially those with learning disabilities for non compliance.

    And the DWP under Labour do not appear to currently be trying to reduce sanctioning to only being used sparingly as a last resort. Quite the opposite they have hit record levels of sanctioning.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 hours ago
      @john This is what has terrified me right from the start. I'm 90% housebound because I'm too ill to go out. I can't work without it making me more ill. I can't look for work without it making me more ill. Continued stress pushes me into irreversible relapse. I'm now in constant pain just from the stress of being made homeless and bullied by a council who wanted me to just sleep rough. I dread to think what would happen to me if I was forced to seek work or lose everything. It would definitely result in my death, I don't want to be alive most of the time anyway. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @john
      "And for those eligible for UC health/LCWRA the government is planning at increasing conditionality and sanctions at first only support conversation but latter expanding conditionality if too few people take up the advice and help towards and into work."

      As things stand it is only possible to get LCWRA by going through a WCA and being classed as unfit for work. If they are going to try applying conditionality to people who have been found unfit for work I cannot see how that can possibly work. Trying to force people into work who have already been found unfit for work is utterly insane. It's probably academic anyway, because we don't know what is going to happen in 2028 and we probably won't have any clarity on what will happen to current LCWRA claimants until the WCA abolition legislation comes forward. At that point there may well be another rebellion, so it's impossible to say what will come out of that process.

      From my own point of view, if they do reassess existing UC Health recipients under the new PIP-based system I would lose UC Health and as a result I would not have enough to survive. If I were then subject to a conditionality regime I could not possibly meet then I would have no income at all. Whether I have no income or not enough to survive on makes little difference: I won't survive either way. If that scenario becomes reality I would not want to be here and that would be the time to check out. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @john Agreed.

      I think it’s important we all keep on contacting those in government with our concerns.

      I still question point 5.4 - because it is linked to point 3 -
      “The Secretary of State may make transitional or saving provision”.

      https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0267/240267.pdf
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 4 hours ago
    Does anyone know if kemi badenoch has said how the tories will vote on Tuesday? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Anon Against as the bill according to Kemi does not cut welfare enough and the government will not commit to not increasing taxes. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Anon Kemi Badenoch is worse than labour she thinks the cuts are not enough.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 6 hours ago
    So what happens if they say about the changes and gets voted through and then dont do it because these Ministers lie through their teeth
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Simon
      At the 3rd reading of the bill the government's concessions should be amendments on the face of the bill. In the text of the primary legislation. That can only be changed in future by a debate and vote in parliament.

      18th June
      1st reading of the bill. The bill is announced to the commons and published.

      27th June
      Parliamentary briefing paper for the bill published to give MPs context.

      1st July
      2nd reading of the bill. Does the commons agree with the general principles/objective of the bill. Short debate and vote on the bill. No amendments to the bill are tabled or voted on.

      9th July
      Committee stage. The bill is looked through line by line.
      Reporting stage. The commons debates the bill in detail, amendments are tabled and voted on.
      3rd reading of the bill as amended. Short debate and vote on if to pass the bill.

      Bill goes to the Lords. If it is a money bill the Lords cannot amend the bill and if the Lords do not pass the bill it still goes to royal ascent 1 month after going to the Lords as it is purely within the commons financial privilege.   


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 3 hours ago
      @Simon that's what will happen. it's a con trick
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 7 hours ago
    I still unsure if these sweeteners to the proposed changes mean UC LCWRA-only claimants will have to start claiming PIP to continue getting UC or not. It's ridiculous that I have to claim a benefit I don't need in order to get a benefit I do need.

    With any luck, enough MPs will vote against the bill and that should be the ousting of Starmer by the end of next week. We may have our own 4th of July celebrations coming up.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Ajohnymous
      "I still unsure if these sweeteners to the proposed changes mean UC LCWRA-only claimants will have to start claiming PIP to continue getting UC or not"

      I don't think we will know the answer to that until the WCA abolition legislation comes forward. When Labour MPs realise that making UC Health dependent on PIP daily living means a huge number of people will lose out - 600,000 of us who currently get UC Health but not PIP plus however many people who do currently get PIP daily living but will lose it under the new criteria - there is a distinct possibility of another major rebellion. What that would produce is impossible to say at present.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 2 hours ago
      @Ajohnymous I sincerely hope so!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 11 hours ago
    The UNITE article highlights something forgotten in this latest furore - the lack of support.for young people still in the proposals, not just for new claimants:

    "The government’s latest plans for disabled benefits cuts are divisive and sinister. Creating a two-tier system where younger disabled people and those who become disabled in the future will be disadvantaged and denied access to work and education, is morally wrong.

    “We need a system which ensures that disabled people get the support they need to enter the workplace and receive an education, the government’s plans specifically prevent this happening."

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.unitetheunion.org/news-events/news/2025/june/government-welfare-plans-create-unfair-two-tier-system-unite&ved=2ahUKEwiYzuzJtZWOAxW0WEEAHVYfFyIQxfQBKAB6BAgHEAE&usg=AOvVaw2-3dg_PaFy65ozL6rBKr01
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 12 hours ago
    https://t.co/niIv1hfEuE

    I would raise a glass to mcsweeney getting axed
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 13 hours ago
    Do we really TRUST these MUPPETS in charge?

    Because it sounds like on the 2nd reading of the bill on the 1st July 

    MP's will really not know what there voting for.

    The concessions made will not be ready to read in time (apparently)

    No third reading as it could take months. They will vote then a few hours later will get the results. Also have asked to be a money bill !!!!!

    No clarification on what happen in 2028 when the WCA get scrapped, 
    Will existing claimants just transfer to the new health element or be reassessed. WHO KNOWS, 

    Just seems to be a lot a trust and why the rush to get this bill passed? 

    Not sure about anyone else but I don't trust anything the MUPPETS say. Cos they all Lie lie lie lie oh yes lie.......

    Also will they ramp up existing claimants for assessments?

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 13 hours ago
    One day to go. Sign, share, copy and paste. Get the numbers up. Yes I am repeating myself, I can't sleep. Instead of feeling helpless and desperate, i try to take action whenever I can. This is so important, so, sorry gotta keep trying. Every little thing can help. It certainly can't do any harm. 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 14 hours ago
    See Starmer was back out tonight trotting out the same lines..... protect the most vulnerable but those who can work should.....

    Can I ask exactly at what stage did PIP become an OUT OF WORK benefit- i must have missed that? 

    I'm still struggling to comprehend how cutting hundreds of thousands of peoples lifelines will help get people into work? 

    Lastly have any of you read the transcript of Timms in front of the committee last week...... spending on the welfare state is still at 5% of gdp exactly were it's been over the blast decade.... liars the lot of them saying things are spiralling. The increase in pip claimants he also admitted is most likely related to government policy.... ie- increase in pension age, nhs waiting times, and people have probably always been eligible but cost of living crisis mean they're actually applying. 


    LIARS....... THE LOT OF THEM!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 5 hours ago
      @Arthritic Annie I had phone into radio 4's any answers to correct Anita Anand when she said pip was an out of work beneifit. they broadcast my correction to their assertion. this is on any ansers on radio 4 on saturday 28 june 2025, I don't get on air on this one, but the phone staff did take my correction seriously. good on r4 for doing this. the reason why the govt fudge what pip is for? so people think pip is an out of work beneifit. tell people it is, and those who dont claim it will put pressure on govt to cut it. and there was a misaprehension on r4, any answers, that when you got into work, you stopped claiming pip, erhrhrh no. I squashed that too, though don't know if it made to aair, as was squeashing things in realtime from my phone in suffolk.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 hours ago
      @Arthritic Annie
      "I'm still struggling to comprehend how cutting hundreds of thousands of peoples lifelines will help get people into work?"
      DWP officials themselves say it wont: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9w1p44vzleo
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 13 hours ago
      @Arthritic Annie Very sadly I think all the parties are as bad as each other. The Tories and reform will be even worse. It's not good. I don't even know what to do anymore. Keep on keeping on and trying. I know that's really not going to be much consolation to people, but I am really trying to stay positive with every fibre in my body. 😡 I have to, got a child to live for, all thats keeping me going.  Still we're here for each other on Here.. And I'm not ashamed to admit that I will ring helplines if absolutely necessary. Except the crisis team. Awful lot. There are no words to describe how dreadful they are. At least not words I can use on this forum, if you get my meaning? They have actually caused me more harm. I won't ever use them again. I've done the whole waiting patiently in A &E for 12 hours plus. I got 5 minutes with 2 kids, younger than my 26 year old daughter. Told to contact doctor the next day, a week for an appointment. And on and on again. I'm sure there will be people on here who can relate! Its cool, only
      Had 30 years of this bully crap. I,m 44 years old. Hey ho. Anyhow stay strong. Love and light to you all. Keep on the fight. Round 100 ding ding ! 🤣 I joke because I have too, otherwise I'd lose my mind completely, been  there, don't fancy doing it again. I know it's far from funny. Just how I cope. Please excuse me.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 13 hours ago
      @Arthritic Annie Thank you Arthritic Annie, well said. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 14 hours ago
    Iain Duncan Smith had written an interesting piece for the Telegraph.  He was the "brains" behind Universal Credit, and famously resigned from government when the financial element of the LCW group was removed by whoever was the Chancellor at the time.   Interestingly, the existing claimants continued to get it, but new claimants didn't.  IDS stated back in March on Politics Live that he wouldn't vote for the new bill because he didn't believe in taking money from the disabled.    Anyway, here's his piece from the Telegraph.  

    As an aside http://archive.ph is a way of seeing news articles behind paywalls.  If you need to use it for an article you find, open a new tab, put the archive url in and then follow the basic instructions. 

    https://archive.ph/iDTLB
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 hours ago
      @SLB If even Iain Duncan Smith is balking at the bill... you know it's real bad.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 hours ago
    From Tom scotson on twitter:

    Labour MP Rachel Maskell is asking MPs to sign a new *reasoned amendment* to block the welfare reform bill

    Maskell's new amendment rejects the bill because:

    — No consultation with disabled groups
    — OBR will not analyse impact of reforms until late 2025
    — Employment funding will not be ready until end of decade
    — No government impact assessment
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    About these amendments, if they do not present them to the Commons floor by Tuesday, will the vote be pulled?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 hours ago
      @Phil C No, they can’t amend the wording by Tuesday so are asking MPs to vote for it with a promise it will be amended by 3rd reading I think 🤔
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    Is there a list of Mp's who are still voting against it.Hopefully mine is still on it
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 hours ago
      @Dee please publish list.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 hours ago
      @Fiona I would really like to see this as well. I think everyone is trying to organise at the moment. I think MPs are rethinking their next move if they were not strongly against based on public contacting them out of worry. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    What's the likelihood of this bill being passed next week?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 hours ago
      @tintack Although only one rebel Labour mp has confirmed they now are supporting the bill so far

      And one paper has a quote from an no saying only a handful of the rebels have jumped ship

      Of the confirmed 126? Known named Labour rebel MPs we need about 75% to carry on rebelling (there could be other Labour rebels that are keeping their position quiet so not to get hassled by whips?)

      It’s been about 48 years since a government bill was defected at the second reading - it was always going to be an uphill battle

      I personally can’t call this vote - could go either way at this point
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 hours ago
      @tintack which 50 MP's
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 hours ago
      @YogiBear
      It's looking likely to be passed, but it's not certain. Around 85 Labour MPs would need to vote against, assuming there are no abstentions (though there could be some). Reports suggest there is a WhatsApp group of about 50 Labour MPs still intendng to vote against and there are said to be others who are still unsure how to vote, so the government hasn't got this in the bag yet. This quote from an MP:

      "it shouldn't be underestimated the potential effect of a weekend of emails from constituents, constituency surgeries etc"

      suggests it's still worth e-mailing MPs before the vote. It could be very close.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @YogiBear That's what we all want to know. All I can advise is for everyone to contact their MP, sign & share petitions and try to stay strong. Sorry I can't give you a clearer answer. Hopefully we will all have a better understanding soon. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Keeping the fight up to the bitter end. I might be frigile, but I'm also obsessive and stubborn. This bull shine dominates my thoughts every day, but it just makes me more determined. 😔🤣
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.