The Politico website has claimed that a bill to cut disability benefits will be introduced to parliament next week, allowing the first vote to take place as early as 30 June.

Whilst we have no way of knowing if this is correct, Labour are definitely running out of time if they want the bill to have completed all its commons stages by the start of the Summer recess on 22 July.

So this seems a good point at which to look at how Labour may try to rush the bill through parliament with minimum scrutiny and how campaigners can be prepared for this.

First reading

The forthcoming bill has to go through several stages before it becomes law.

The initial step is the first reading, which simply involves the bill’s title being read out in the commons.  It is usually published immediately afterwards, so we will get our first look at the details.

The bill will very probably only introduce the changes to universal credit (UC) payment rates for new claims, due to take effect from 6 April 2026, and the 4-point rule for personal independence payment (PIP) due to start in November 2026.

Second reading

The second reading is where the bill is debated by the whole House of Commons and a vote takes place. The second reading doesn’t usually happen until at least two weekends have elapsed after the first reading.

So, if Labour publish the bill anywhere between Monday 16 and Friday 20 June, the second reading could take place as early as Monday 30 June.

The bill could be voted down at this stage if enough Labour MPs rebel and opposition parties unite against it.

If not, it will carry on to the committee stage. 

Meanwhile, Labour whips will be targeting any rebels they think they can bully or bribe into supporting the government and also leaning on anyone they think might be at risk of going over to the rebels.

Bear in mind that some Labour MPs may be thinking of rebelling but are waiting until the third reading, in order to give the government a chance to make its case before finally deciding.  So even if this first vote is won by the government, all is not lost.

Committee stage

The committee stage can be a lengthy affair. 

A “public bill committee” of 17 MPs take evidence from the public and from experts, before debating and selecting amendments to be put before the whole House.  The make up of the committee reflects that of the House, so there would be a Labour majority.

After a public bill committee there is a report stage for the whole house to look at what has been done in committee and vote on amendments.

Straight after the report stage, the bill goes to its third reading and a vote.

However, in this case, the suspicion is that Labour will opt for a “committee of the whole house”.  This means that all MPs get to take part in the discussion of amendments and vote on them.  But, no evidence from the public or experts is allowed and the whole process will be completed in a single day.

There is also no report stage, so the bill goes straight to its third reading after committee.   

So a committee of the whole house is an effective way to rush a bill through and prevent MPs hearing from disability charities, think tanks, disabled people’s organisations and claimants themselves.

Third reading

Once the bill has completed its report stage, if there is one, a third reading takes place. 

This is the final opportunity for MPs to either pass or reject the bill.  No further amendments are allowed, so MPs must either accept the whole bill or reject it all. 

Depending on how the proceedings have gone, some rebels may decide to back down and support the government or some loyalists may decide that they have not been convinced by the government and will now join the rebels.

House of Lords

Ordinarily, after the third reading, the bill would go to the House of Lords where amendments may be made and the bill is then passed back to the Commons, who can either accept or reject them. The bill may then go back and forth between the two houses until agreement is reached.  This can take many months.

The House of Lords is made up of:

  • 286 Conservative
  • 212 Labour
  • 181 crossbench
  • 77 Liberal Democrat

Plus around 90 non-affiliated peers, bishops and smaller parties.

So, Labour does not have a majority in the Lords and, if the Conservatives decide to oppose the bill, the Lords could delay its passage for a considerable period, whilst pressuring the Commons to accept amendments.

However, there is a strong possibility that Labour will try to have this bill certified as a money bill.

If Labour succeed in doing so, then the House of Lords can hold up the bill for a maximum of a month and pass amendments.  But the government can simply ignore the amendments and, at the end of the one month period, the bill is sent for Royal Assent and becomes law.  So, in most cases, the Lords do not suggest amendments to a money bill and it passes without opposition.

Getting certified as a money bill

Ultimately, it isn’t up to Labour to decide if a bill can be certified as a money bill.  This is a decision for the Speaker of the House, advised by officials.

And the Speaker won’t give a ruling until the bill has completed the committee and, if there is one, report stage.  This is because amendments to the bill could change its nature and mean that it could no longer be certified as a money bill.

The introduction of the 4-point rule for PIP can probably be passed off as being solely about public finance, as its primary aim is to reduce the cost of disability benefits.

But there is certainly an argument that the changes to UC are primarily about social policy rather than money, because the aim is to reduce the alleged “perverse incentive” for people to claim benefits rather than work.  It’s not a money-saving provision: it simply moves cash from disabled claimants to those who are capable of work, in order to effect “behavioural change”.

Whatever the Speaker decides, however, that is the end of the matter and there is no way of challenging the decision, even in court.

What Labour hopes

Labour is very much hoping that the bill will pass all its Commons stages before the Summer recess starts on 22 July.

But they will also be hoping that it will be able to bypass effective scrutiny from the House of Lords, otherwise the process may drag on into the Autumn, when the Office for Budget responsibility will publish its assessment of how many disabled claimants are likely to find work.

What can campaigners do?

A great deal depends on what happens over the next few weeks and campaigners should be ready to begin another round of emails, letters and protests at very short notice.

Once we know what is in the bill, people will want to contact their MP and tell them how they hope they will vote.

It will still also be worth contacting local councillors and asking them to speak urgently to their MP.

And anything that can be got into local media and social media encouraging people to contact their MPs has to be worth doing.

In addition, if you have any connection with disability charities, right now is the time to urge them to prepare a mail (or email) shot to MPs.  Because there is a real chance the process will be over very quickly, without them having any opportunity to give evidence at committee stage.

Finally, it will definitely be worth sending messages of support and encouragement to MPs who vote against the bill at second reading, if it does go on to committee stage, because they will be getting a lot of flak from some quarters.  And if your MP voted in favour of the bill, it will still be worth politely trying to persuade them to change their mind, as they may well be wavering.

Please note:  we are very far from being experts on parliamentary procedure, so if you spot any errors in this article, please do contact us and we will correct them.

Latest news on PIP/UC changes

What’s changing, when

What you can do

New PIP test

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 days ago
    I've got 2 weeks to make out my migration form to UC ,and to be fair I can't even bear looking at it the stress is so much.
    I just can't believe what's happening. 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 4 hours ago
      @DJ
      Is it 'naughty' of me to suggest that if you do have to go in for a face to face nightmare that you remember how PIP assessments were - ie if you burped and it looked like you just might have smiled, then you were judged fit. The whole stupidness of you have to come in for your assessment and when you do becuse you HAVE TO OR THEY WILL STOP or not give you any benefits (then no money, no home, eventual slow 'death') and then turn around and say you got here so you're not sick - its LUDICROUS - people who have been getting benefits for decades having to prove who they are? if the DWP isn't sure, isnt it a bit f'ing late to raise that issue now? I was taken by my key worker who had dressed and washed me and I got told because I was clean and dressed I was obviously ok and also I understood my illnesses (intelligence not health lol) so I wasn't sick and anyway I usd o be a teacher so I can obv do all sorts of things - it would be funny if it wasn't so stressful - I already had PTSD but it developed into complex PTSD through DWP interactions - anyway - moving on - I'd make sure you leave NO ROOM for anyone to question your sickness and arrive in a wheelchair or on a trolley or with 4 or 5 helpers etc etc if you get me...
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Mick G Honestly Mick you NEED to do it otherwise they WILL take the ESA away and you will NOT qualify for the Transitional Protection. 

      They WILL NOT do the UC claim for you and IF you do NOT make the application via the migration notice that they have sent you then you will NOT receive any money at all.

      That is how EVIL it is.

      If you read my response(s) back to James below then call CAB help to claim line as James is right it does time you out really quickly. Via computer and/or 'app. Request that the CAB make the 3 way call and stay on the line with you. 

      However, as you will read from my posts below even with the CAB the HELL of it all does NOT stop there.

      I am house bound, etc.., in support group but they are making it really difficult for a home visit from the Job Centre to confirm my identity because I do NOT have any photographic evidence! 

      It is STRESSFUL Mick no doubt about that I am NOT going to lie to you but the alternative if you do NOT make the transition is that your ESA WILL STOP and they will NOT pay you anything.

      I will Keep you updated tomorrow as to how my call goes with CAB over arguing for reasonable adjustments for them to do biographical identity verification check with me. 

      However, at least now my claim has been made for migration across from ESA to UC the rest you need to fight for with them can be done after you have made the initial claim.

      CAB telephone details are on your migration notice letter it is a free line number and you can be waiting a long time to get through but they are very KIND and will guide you. Right up to your 1st correct payment of UC going into your bank account!

      For me they KNOW that I am also having to really be 'VOCAL' over reasonable adjustments for identification check I am who I say I am as I have NO photo id!

      However, CAB are also guiding me through that process.

      There WILL be major complaint if anything haappens to me while they are making it so I have to attend Job Centre just with ID. To prove I am who I say I am.

      Unfortunately, as the way it is all playing out at the moment I do FIRMLY believe that there are going to be a lot of negligence claims against JOB CENTRES they are NOT equiped to deal with the level of complexities of severe ill health and disabilities and placing demands on those in the support or LCWRA group to go in to verify you are who you say you are is the 1st mistake of many more to come as they are NOT equiped at Job Centres to either assist or administer 1st aid.

      Let me get this out of the way then complaints will be made. If they have NOT got enough home visit workers to attend then they should NOT have damn well rushed this through as they have.

      ABSOLUTLY ATROCIOUS
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Mick G Mick, the process isn't as bad as it looks.  It is pretty straightforward, and the good thing is that, once your UC account is set up, you can ask questions via it and you will get a reply in one or two days at most.  The biggest issue that I've found is adapting to monthly payments - especially when PIP continues to be 4-weekly and so changes its day of the month each time.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @James I do NOT understand how they could have eroded your claim for you migrating across in May as the financial year starts in April of every year! That is worth mentioning though James for others that are now having to be migrated across from ESA after you as the final deadline date for ESA ending as we all KNOW it is everyone to be moved across by April 2026 (next year) which would mean those remaining would get their migration notice letters at the latest by around March of next year meaning that they would have until June to be migrated across with the 3 months they allow.

      Unless they have brought that ALL forward and the final letters go out by  the Autumn of this year!

      It is ALL beyond cruel.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @DJ DJ sounds a nightmare all that and more problems on the way with the green paper I got a mum who supports me and good housing and still might be able to get the new pip and uc health element with autistic spectrum so I will fight on for now  but have had some dark thoughts myself and without my mum it could of been the end for me too
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Since the Commons asserted financial privilege (money bill) for the Welfare Reform Act 2012. I expect Labour will not have a problem getting their welfare bill the same privilege. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @john I'm not sure, but it looks to me like - if it's not a money bill - the Lords could just reject the entire bill without attempting to amend any of it.  As this will be the biggest cut in welfare benefits in living memory, absolutely none of it was in the Labour manifesto and Labour have refused to consult on it then there would be good reason for the Lords to do just that if they believe that Labour will block any amendment on financial privilege grounds.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @SLB OK I was wrong the Welfare Reform Act 2012 was not a money bill. The House of Commons just invoked financial privilege on 46 Lords Amendments that were not cost neutral. So the government got to decided yes/no for those Amendments with no debate in the Commons and any further debate on those Amendments in the Lords rendered meaningless as the Commons has financial privilege.

      Labours welfare bill will impose the 4pt PIP rule to reduce eligibility and save money, freeze UH health to save money, half UC health for new claimants except those in the severely disabled for life never expected to work group to save money.  
      What cost neutral Lords Amendments are people hoping for. As for anything that is not cost neutral the Commons can invoke financial privilege and the government just decide yes or no with no debate in the Commons and any further debate in the Lord's rendered meaningless as the Commons has financial privilege.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @DJ This is from the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster from Feb 14th 2012:

      "That resolution settled the relationship between the two Houses for a long time, until the trauma of the Finance Bill of 1909 when this House rejected Lloyd George’s Budget. That led to the Parliament Act of 1911, which put the legislative relationship between the two Houses on a statutory footing and formally circumscribed our role in Bills which deal exclusively with expenditure or taxation or the granting or raising Toggle showing location ofColumn 682of loans—Bills referred to as money Bills. For the avoidance of doubt, the Welfare Reform Bill is not a money Bill. It is a normal public Bill, some provisions of which relate to expenditure. "

      If this is classed as a regular bill next week, then we still have hope even if it gets through the Commons stages, because the impact assessment will have been published by the time it returns to the Commons in the autumn.  It is, I fear, our only real hope. 


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard I'm so grateful I studied film and not law!!!  So this is a positive for us, right?  If the 2012 one wasn't a money bill, it's likely this one won't be either?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard
      The author you quoted latter clarifiied and partially concede their opinion. And listed possible things the Lords could have done in response to the Commons invoking financial privilege in 2012 Welfare Bill but did not do. 

      "I frankly concede that they for the most part indicate that the Lords have, in that period, and with a few isolated protests, accepted the claim of privilege in respect of bills relating to expenditure on social welfare policy. This is a material addition to my earlier post, and it supports the view that the reliance on the privilege in disagreeing Lords amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill is not a strong break with past (if sporadic) practice."
      Dr Jeff King
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Posted by DPAC on their X page.

    The first reading of the welfare reform (cuts) bill will be on 18th June 2025 The second reading and the vote will be on 3rd July 2025
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @YogiBear Thanks. Two weeks is nothing though🤬
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    In other news they plan to scrap the Vagrancy Act from 1824 in preparation for the surge in homelessness brought about by these evil cuts. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @CarolK Couldn't make us criminals, could they - there's no room in the jails.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Posted by DPAC on their X page recently.

    The first reading of the welfare reform (cuts) bill will be on 18th June 2025 The second reading and the vote will be on 3rd July 2025
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @YogiBear Thanks. Grim. At least we will know the full contents of this horror bill next week.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    From Opposition to Oppressor: Starmer’s Benefit Cuts Target Disabled & Poor Families
    Remember when Sir Keir Starmer, that paragon of principled opposition, stood in the Commons and denounced the Tories’ £20 Universal Credit cut as “indefensible,” “unfair,” and “unacceptable”? How his voice quivered with righteous indignation as he championed the vulnerable against Conservative cruelty?
    What hollow performance that was. With the government benches still warm from those pampered Tory behinds, Starmer has revealed his true colours, not red, but the deepest, darkest blue. The Wolf of Westminster has shed his sheep’s clothing, and his first meal is the disabled and the poor.
    The Scale of Betrayal: Worse Than We Thought
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    If it get voted down by MPS at stage 2 what happens after that ?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Chenners The government would go back to the drawing board or make amendments
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Online event - next Monday evening - organised by Richard Burgon MP.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Thanks B&W for all that information. So there’s news today in the guardian that the PIP cuts might be tweaked. Though I’m not convinced by the article. But if PIP 4 points rule becomes law that’s it isn’t it?. No chance of any tweaks or could they still tweak it even though the bill is there. . I mean could they be softened still they were talking about people having a higher combined total of points. This is really confusing. I mean is it how you interpret the law..
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @D
      @D Exactly. Standard rate recipients could well achieve a higher award. A shot in the foot for government, just like Reeves encouraging claims for the much greater award, pension credit, to qualify for piffling winter fuel payment, and just like people applying for disability and incapacity benefits to replace the pensions they lose because of the rise in state pension age. How is it none of these privileged oxbridge idiots cannot detect cause and effect?

      If the 4 point rule is imposed every single claimant who loses their award MUST challenge the decision. First it's mandatory reconsideration, then tribunal. If the tribunal judge agrees with you there's no need for upper tribunal. There's plenty of time to get your case together and gather more evidence. This fight will never stop until we win, and every time we're threatened, we HAVE to keep fighting.



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Helen Galloway There is the tribunal system that could change small parts at a time

      By that I mean a claimant who doesn’t agree with pip points at their tribunal could make the point that a 2pt descriptor should be changed to a 4pt descriptor. If the judge agrees I think the case could be taken to upper tribunal/supreme court and if a judge rules a descriptors points amount should be changed their decision overrides the dwp and their sec of state.

      I’ve probably explained that very badly and misunderstood much of the process

      I’ll draw attention to a ‘precedent’ to this being the “MM vs sec of state for dwp” case a few years back for pip activity 9 where something similar happened and a lot of us have gotten backpay due to gaining an extra 2pts points pushing us into exhanced care element




      The irony is that if some activity descriptors currently worth 2pts gets challenged and the courts rule and force the dwp to uprate the points up to 4pts many standard care pip claimants could find the 2 extra pts pushes them over to an enhanced care award and more money each week (that happened with me after the mm ruling - the 2 extra points got me over the 12pt threshold for enhanced award) and the increased enhanced care pip awards (plus any backpay if applicable) could wipe out any savings Kendall intents to make and actually sharply raise the pip bill instead

      So called “Behavioural changes” (aka taking necessary action in trying to survive) could also make the 4pt rule backfire in the same way

      Not only is the 4pt rule cruel but it’s also stupid and may likely backfire and a prime example why rushing through pip cuts is a bad idea all round (didn’t stride even point out yesterday that it was a mistake rushing through cuts even though he’s the poster child for disability benefit cuts?)





    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Let’s hope so but with it being a law I wondered . Though I suppose anything is possible. . I’m pleased I kept busy this week because I would have struggled. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Helen Galloway Well Helen, they U-turned on the WFP after they had passed it.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Hello,  Does anyone know Sir Lindsay Hoyle's  views on Benefit & Social cuts etc?    as per above he as the Speaker of the House, will certify as a money bill or not, if that is the route it takes.  Personally i think the hard nosed, super stubborn Trio Starmer, Reeves & Kendal, have had this in their sights for at least 10 years, if you dig into their pasts.

    I cant see Sir Lindsay Hoyle's voting record on They work for you, only his expenses/donations etc 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Thank you Yorkie, its funny that did cross my mind but did not pursue finding if that was the reason, whilst here, the little. i know and seen of him seems to me me he is fairly reasonable/compassionate. But lets hope so if it comes to the money bill situ..........   pretty much game over if allowed.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @clearwater Hoyle could become public enemy number 1 for the disability community 

      (Well number 4 or 5 - I think most of us would love karma to bite Kendall, reeves and timms in the form of losing their minister positions then their seats in 4 years time)
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @clearwater It's less about how they vote, and more about Commons procedure.  Hoyle (and Bercow before him) has regularly chastised the govt of the day for trying to pervert Commons procedures.  We saw it with Bercow in Brexit votes and Hoyle had strong words just last week for Labour making important announcements outside of the Commons.  So he will do things by the book, I think, and will no doubt take advice from his assistants that know the practices of the Commons inside out.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @clearwater Clearwater - you can't find his voting record because the Speaker is not allowed to vote.


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    It still seems in doubt if pensioners will be exempt from the 4 point rule. If they did not score 4 points when awarded pip, will they just lose it at the lighttouch review.
    When will we know for sure 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Vicky What is the correct age to get a light touch review if you are in receipt of high rate pip (both elements) and have 1,  4 point?
      Turn2us say after 66yrs, Gov site says only when/after you reach state pension age and AI says 65yrs.
      It would be helpful to have a definate age.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Vicky Everyone who is reviewed is at risk; which is everyone who is on PIP. 

      Timms not being clear on this (and effectively lying by omission) is one of the many issues I have with all of this. 

      Ditto forcing ‘medically retired’ people to look for work if they happen to be on UC, and then losing their ‘disability bit’ of UC (5K) because they are not well enough to work.. 🤯

      No thought at all on how the proposed changes will affect people who receive ill-health pensions and UC. 

      It’s a shambles. They want to implement some changes from April 2026, which is why there is such a rush. 🤬

      Echoes of Brexit. Tell people a bunch of lies then have years of drama/ shambles/ regret…. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Vicky when the Bill gets published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    They are starting to feel the pressure!

    Rachel Reeves has ruled out a U-turn on disability benefit cuts but said she was “taking into account” representations from Labour MPs, and could tweak the qualification rules for the benefits.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard She can shove her "tweaks"
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Slb Let's hope so. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Yeah.  And in her letter published yesterday, Kendall talks about the chance for mps to amend the bill.  Is that a way of saying they aren't going to change their plans because it will look like a u-turn, but they are up for mps to force changes on them? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard When we contact our MPs we need to urge them not to be bought off by "tweaks". Tweaks are nowhere near good enough. The only concessions that are worth anything are scrapping the proposed PIP descriptor changes and scrapping the move to make UC LCWRA dependent on a PIP-type assessment. 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
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.