• Search
  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • News
  • Work and Pensions Committee launches Green Paper inquiry

News

Work and Pensions Committee launches Green Paper inquiry

Details

The House of Commons Work and Pensions Committee is undertaking a short inquiry into the proposals in the Pathways to Work Green Paper which seeks to impose drastic cuts on benefits.

Possibly in view of the short time available and the deluge of responses they would be likely to receive, they are not putting out a call for evidence, so it will not be possible for readers to contribute.

The aims of the committee are:

  • to explore the issues with the social security system the Green Paper is seeking to address;
  • to explore the evidence of the impacts of welfare changes on poverty and employment;
  • to explore the experience of sick and disabled people of the current welfare system and their views on the impacts the changes could have on them; and
  • to explore the link between health status and worklessness, and the potential impacts of the welfare changes on health status.

Committee Chair Debbie Abrahams said:  

“While the Chancellor undoubtedly must respond to financial challenges, there are legitimate concerns regarding the proposed changes to our social security system which would lead to a cut in support for more than three million sick and disabled people and their families, especially if these cuts happen before employment opportunities emerge. It is therefore vital that there is full examination of the evidence of the likely impacts this will have on poverty and employment, as well as the health of sick and disabled people. Our social security system is meant to provide a safety net to support people, so that they are protected from poverty. But we know that there are already 14.3 million people living in poverty, and half of them are sick or disabled people who are not properly supported by our benefits system. We must ensure that new social security policy addresses this.” 

UPDATE 8 APRIL

The Guardian reports that Abrahams will call Department for Work and Pensions ministers to give evidence to its disability cuts mini-inquiry, due to be held over the next few weeks. It will focus on the impact of the changes on claimant health, employment and poverty.

Abrahams said “I wouldn’t want to use the language of revolt. But there are deep concerns. To be fair, DWP ministers are in listening mode, but this isn’t an issue that’s going away.”

She called on the government to pause the changes to ensure proper parliamentary scrutiny of all aspects of the green paper, including changes to PIP eligibility, which ministers insist are not up for consultation.

Read more on the committee website

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.
    Anniesmum
    · 1 days ago
    https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-disability-benefits-cuts-consultation/
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Matt
    · 1 days ago
    Let me ask this forum: if the Government were to offer very substantial tax cuts to employers to employ disabled people, fund access to work properly and also include penal costs who do not employ disabled people (with obvious exceptions such as the military and emergency services), would this 'encourage' more to seek work?  I'm thinking of ways whereby we can mitigate the substantial reduction in our standard of living. I fear that asking this Govt (or any other) to keep PIP as it is will fall on deaf ears. As I mentioned earlier (and not published by B & W), the reason for the cuts is Reeves insistence on sticking to her fiscal rules. We've all seen what the bond markets have done this week in respect of tariffs and before that Liz Truss.  The reason why Labour, let alone the Tories/Reform will not tax the very rich is that they can screw us all over.  Politicians don't have power: the money men in Wall Street and the Stock Exchange in London, do.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gemma
      · 1 days ago
      @Matt Didn't there used to be a cash incentive to employers to employ more disabled people and this had to end because employers were falsifying their records in order to get the money in question? Or is this something I entirely made up in my head? 

      I'm not disagreeing with your suggestion at all but it would be like this government to argue that fraud happening in the past prevents them from giving cash incentives or tax breaks to employers with disabled workers while also using fraud as a means to go after genuinely disabled people.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Carolyn Hucker
    · 2 days ago
    Are the committee fully aware of how being sick and disabled affects every aspect of life? How will they know when members brought before the committee are not being disingenuous? (I use the word out of politeness) 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon
    · 2 days ago
    The green paper reforms will not save any money. Here's why.

    1. Most people who lose LCWRA/PIP by these reforms, will appeal the decision at tribunal.
    2. Most people win their appeal at tribunal.
    3. Those people will then have LCWRA/PIP restored, along with 12+months backpay for the time they waited for tribunal.
    4. Plus the legal costs to challenge the surplus tribunal appeals caused by these reforms will be wasted.

    Therefore, these green paper reforms will not save any money, may even cost more money, and there will be no meaningful numbers of ill and disabled people, who have previously been assessed by a health professional as having limited capability for work and work-related activity, moved permanently in jobs.

    The reforms are dead on arrival. They will not save any money. They will not move disabled people into jobs.

    The only thing they will do, is cause grave hardships for the vast majority of health-professional-assessed seriously ill, vulnerable and disabled people, directly leading to being 400,000 pushed into poverty, and untold thousands of people dying as a direct result of these policies.

    The consequences of this green paper, will also guarantee Labour's loss at the general election.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keepingitreal
      · 1 days ago
      @Carolyn Hucker An appeal would follow the rules under which the decision was made.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Neil Cook
      · 2 days ago
      @Anon Always assuming that a claimant can afford the legal costs in the first place 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Carolyn Hucker
      · 2 days ago
      @Anon The problem is that they may not have the components restored under appeal, since the appeal will have to be applied under the new rules and the government are deliberately invoking rules which exclude people from the lost components.

      As you say though, the proposals won't save money - but mainly because the people affected by the cuts will end up needing care through NHS services instead of the disgustingly poorly supported unpaid carer system. 

      Also, as you say, it will merely serve to ensure that Labour have a single term parliament and then leave us all to the tender mercies of Tory or Reform - both of whom would happily dismantle both the NHS and the Welfare state. So I suppose we're all stuffed anyway. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Skembear
    · 3 days ago
    My West Lancs MP. Works with 500 majority Streeting. The usual tow the party line word salad

    Thank you for your further email.

    As a member of the Government, I support the welfare reforms we are pursuing.

    Sick and disabled people who want to work deserve the same rights, choices and chances as everyone else to do so. We are focused on helping those who can work, and have been previously written off by successive governments, into employment. This Government will always be there to support people who cannot work.

    We have asked the wealthy to pay their fair share of tax. At the Budget last autumn, the Government did increase taxes by £40 billion without asking working people to pay a penny more by abolishing the non-dom tax status, increasing the rates of capital gains tax, and tightening the rules around inheritance tax.

    More broadly, the Government is committed to delivering our plan for change across the country. Since we were elected, the Government has invested an additional £26 billion in the NHS to drive down waiting lists for the fifth month in a row, is making work pay with our landmark Employment Rights Bill, has delivered a £1,400 increase in the national living wage, and has secured record investment into the UK. These are the actions of a Labour Government working for the benefit of people across the country.

    Thank you again for your further email. I sincerely hope that you may again consider supporting the Party.

    Kind regards
    Ashley
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      tintack
      · 1 days ago
      @Skembear
      "We are focused on helping those who can work, and have been previously written off by successive governments, into employment"

      And yet the evidence is crystal clear that you cannot impoverish people out of sickness and into work. The Tories tried that. It turns out that when you cut support to people who already have very little they just become poorer and sicker and it therefore becomes even MORE difficult for them to work. Who'd have thought it?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Carolyn Hucker
      · 2 days ago
      @Skembear I wonder how many people who voted for that MP would view that email, like the rest of us, as insulting and sidestepping the actual substance of the issue. It's pretty much 'we've done this stuff so it's alright if we persecute a few useless lazy buggers who apparently don't want to work even though we think they should'.  

      They don't care that the majority of disabled people do work, and use their PIP to help them keep working. They don't care that many thousands of sick and disabled people wish they could work. I'm good for about ten minutes at a time - a couple of times a day if I'm lucky. Still don't qualify for 4 points. Not much there for your average employer to go for. That's even without the fact I'm housebound without the carer I'll lose. 

      Genuinely never thought I'd live to see the day a labour government would turn on the most vulnerable people in its care. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gemma
      · 3 days ago
      @Skembear "Sick and disabled people who want to work deserve the same rights, choices and chances as everyone else to do so."

      Tell that to the employers who don't want to hire disabled people.

      I'm really tired of these MPs putting the onus of responsibility on us and not society as a whole. And they'll continue to do so when these cuts don't get them the results that they want, which is what is being already predicted.

      I'd say they're living in a fantasy world but that's being too kind. They're fully aware that this won't encourage more people into work, hence why they're already willing to bring in more cuts before what they've already announced has come into play. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anniesmum
    · 3 days ago
    I just had an email back from my MP. Wasn’t sure where to post it.
    Is there anything I can reply with do you think?

    Thank you for inviting me to the Cost of Living Drop-In organised by Scope on 2nd April 2025, and for taking the time to add a personal touch to your email. I assure you that your concerns have been duly noted. Unfortunately, due to prior commitments, I was unable to attend the event. However, members of my team were present on my behalf and collected a briefing pack for the office.



    I believe that the Government must work harder to ensure that disability is not an obstacle to living a full, independent life, where individuals can reach their full potential.



    In recognition of the exceptional circumstances of the last few years, I welcomed that on the 6 April 2024, disability benefits - including Personal Independence Payment, Disability Living Allowance, and Employment and Support Allowance - were increased by 6.7 per cent by the previous Conservative Government.



    Regarding employment, between Q1 2017 and Q1 2022, the number of disabled people in employment in the UK increased by 1.3 million. This means that the previous Conservative Government's goal of seeing one million more disabled people in employment between 2017 and 2027 has been met and exceeded five years ahead of schedule.



    The current Labour Government’s latest announcements on welfare show, by comparison, that they are not up to the task. Their rushed changes are the worst of all worlds, frightening disabled people while failing to address the spiralling cost of welfare.



    Honesty is a key guiding principle for any Government, and I know many people will feel let down by the lack of transparency shown by Labour Frontbenchers before the General Election regarding their plans to reform disability benefits. I am disappointed that, after the Government’s constant shifting of their position, the Prime Minister has arrogantly decided that some of their changes to disability benefits do not require consultation. Government Ministers should be aware of the anxiety they cause families when leaking discussions on welfare to the media before formally announcing detailed policy proposals in Parliament.



    I am sure many recipients of disability benefits in real need of this additional support, such as the WASPI women and pensioners before them, will feel let down by the hypocrisy of the Government's Green Paper. It is even more disappointing when we consider that the £5 billion in savings amounts to little more than a penny-pinching drop in the ocean, while the outdated welfare system urgently calls out for proper reform to ensure it becomes a sustainable safety net of support for the long-term.



    I recognise the importance of this issue and will push the Government to make sensible reforms to welfare – reforms that strengthen the independence of those in genuine need of support, while also making the welfare system more sustainable in the long-term.



    Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.



    Kind regards,



    Mark Garnier OBE MP

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    mags1204
    · 3 days ago
    I think alot of people are talking about pip which i understand. But people are forgetting about the health element on UC. It is to be cut by 50% and frozen. Till 2029. We all ready can't afford things. I had to pay council tax this year. Which was nearly £200. Bills have yet again gone through the roof. And benefits got 1.7%. Inflation is nearly 3%. So doesn't cover my bills and they want to half the health premium.  But nobody is saying anything about it. The government says it will be slightly off set buy the raise in the normal premium but that is £7 extra a week so take £50 and give you £7  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Cecelia
      · 5 hours ago
      @WorkshyLayabout Better the 😈 devil you know
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      WorkshyLayabout
      · 17 hours ago
      @Gemma Submitting bank statements and being interrogated is not new and exclusive to UC claimants. Has been going on for years. You should be even more concerned about the snooping into claimants' bank accounts.  

      That bone that Jeremy Hunt was going to throw us was to give everyone in the support group permanent support-group status and to never be reassessed. You complain about lifetime awards of DLA being stopped as unfair, yet you have the nerve to call the offer of lifetime awards and over a million people no longer having to endure WCAs a small bone. It would not have been a small bone to those of us it applied to. 

      You are also accusing me of ignoring the harm the Tories did because people were gullible enough to vote Labour. It was possible to be aware of the harm the Tories did while also being aware that Labour would be just as bad. Knowing one fact did not mean not knowing the other. 

      To your question about why Tories do not believe the proposed reforms go far enough, the answer is simple. As Labour becomes more right wing, the Tories have to become even more right wing to keep their position to the political right of Labour. 

      "In fact, I would make the argument that the cuts that the Conservatives introduced have emboldened Labour to walk down the same path."

      This argument is nonsense. Why would Labour choose to walk down the same path as the Tories, who are supposed to be on opposite side of the political spectrum? 

      Labour did not have a landslide victory. There are 48,200,000 registered voters. Labour received just over 9.7 million votes. Only 1 in 5 eligible voters voted Labour. Some of that 20% of the British electorate wanted rid of the Conservatives, while not considering voting in a Labour Government would bring little change. 

      The Tories are right wing; they admit it. Reform is right wing; they admit it. The Greens are left wing; they admit it. It’s called honesty - whether you agree with their policies or not. And for each of these parties, we know where they stand with regards to benefits. 

      Rachel Reeves (when shadow minister for work and pensions) made it clear 10 years ago. "We don’t want to be seen, and we’re not, the party to represent those who are out of work.” And “Labour are a party of working people, formed for and by working people.” People incapable of work due to sickness or disability were not welcome in the Labour Party a decade ago. Plenty of time for voters to realise what Labour were like. Could not have been a clearer statement of Labour’s disregard for those needing to survive on benefits. 

      I have no sympathy for anyone who voted Labour because Labour were to be kinder to the sick, the disabled, the poor. Labour told us they would not be kinder. One thing Labour did say before the election was they would reform the whole benefits system and make work pay. Those who can work should work was a statement reguitated several times by Labour. Political speech for cutting benefits. There is no excuse for a single person to pretend they did not know what Labour’s policies on benefits would be. They had years to figure it out, not weeks before the election. 

      It's ludicrous that someone would vote for a political party because of the party's views on benefits when that party said very little about the welfare system. But the little they did say was pure bashing of and contempt for the benefits system. 

      History shows Labour do not change anything about the Tories' benefits plan. 

      Starmer is a ruthless man. He has said so himself. Once he got the leader's position, he culled all in the party that are pro-welfare. He called claiming benefits as undignified in an interview with a right-wing newspaper. In his opinion, handouts lack the dignity of wages.
       
      Labour may not have said too much about benefits, but everything they said pointed towards tough benefits crackdowns.

      Voting in Labour with the sole purpose of removing the Conservatives was a case of cutting one's nose off to spite one's face.

      It's time to start addressing the reasons why a traditionally left-wing party now has right-wing neoliberal values, ditched its founding principles and actively sought out the right wing vote. Starmef and Reeves both wrote articles for the Daily Mail. These articles were very appealing to the right-wing voter. Why would a MP from an allegedly left-wing party be soliciting for votes from readers of a definitely right-wing paper? 1.) The left-wing party has left-wing policies and expects the right-wing voter to do a 180⁰ politcal u-turn or 2.) The "left-wing" party's policies are appealing to the right-wing voting reader. The answer is not 1.).
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gemma
      · 1 days ago
      @WorkshyLayabout "The Tories were constantly trying to cut benefits, but never during their 14 years in charge was there this amount of anger and upset."

      People - particularly children - who were on indefinite awards for DLA and who lost the award due to PIP being introduced would disagree with you, to be honest. 

      Furthermore, the introduction of UC also brought about powers that border on harassment. I don't know about you but I personally find disabled people having to submit bank statements and explain what they've spent their money on so that DWP can decide whether or not it counts as deprivation of capital incredibly intrusive. Unless there is a rampant issue of dozens of disabled people out there forking out thousands and thousands of pounds for a Rolls Royce, it really is none of their business what we spend our money on.

      The same goes for having to attend work coach appointments. Ideally, you should be able to organise a phone appointment if you are unable to attend due to your disability but the amount of people who I'm familiar with who were sanctioned for this reasoning anyway is not even funny. 

      All of this was introduced under the Conservatives. Like I said to Anon, just because it appears like these changes have not affected you personally does not mean it did not cause genuine harm to thousands of other claimants. 

      In fact, I would make the argument that the cuts that the Conservatives introduced have emboldened Labour to walk down the same path. Not to mention our geopolitical climate becoming more right-leaning and more intolerant towards minorities including disabled people over the years. 

      Am I excusing Labour by saying this? No, absolutely not. But there's no easier way to gleam how your policies that target the disabled are going to go down when you've seen your political opponents implement policies that are just as devastating without a hitch in previous years. 

      You have also failed to address how the Tories are currently saying that Labour are not going far enough with these cuts outside of 'at least they're being honest, unlike Labour'.

      At yet you're out here saying that Labour voters should've picked up on the signs while also ignoring the actual harm that the Tories did and the rhetoric they've come out in recent months because Jeremy Hunt claimed he would throw us the smallest bone two years ago. 

      With all due respect, this reads like a bit of a double standard. You can't condemn Labour voters and say they should've known better but completely ignore the blatant hateful rhetoric coming from the Tories and Reform and borderline give them kudos for honesty.

      To sum it all up, I have much less sympathy for those who will continue supporting the Tories and Reform after the statements they've come out with than those who voted Labour last year before their policies became more concrete and they seemed to have some element of sympathy for us. 

      Yes, Kendall and Reeves came out with their respective statements regarding benefits but there is also a paper trail of Labour opposing welfare cuts whenever the Tories proposed them (i.e. Kendall posting a petition that opposed said cuts to her X account several years ago, Reeves stating that the system for PIP would not change a month or so before the election). 

      The Tories wished for PIP claimants to live on vouchers. Sure, that may have suited some people but if the claimant did not work or lacked a pension to fall back on, this was a disastrous proposal. Thus, they did not wish to vote for the Tories. It's hardly surprising. 

      Also, a lot of disabled people - through no fault of their own - are vulnerable and will be taken in by people who spin a certain narrative. I think putting the blame onto disabled people for not wanting to live on vouchers and voting for Labour and hoping for the best is not only incredibly unproductive but it also comes across as a tad superior.

      Furthermore, who is to say that every disabled person voted for Labour? They had a landslide victory. Myself and quite a lot of people I know voted for Green, for example, hence why they did about as well as Reform. Same goes for Lib Dems. 

      And what's done is done at the end of the day but cannibalising each other over who we did/didn't vote for and consistently turning this issue into a Tories vs. Labour vs. Reform debate is completely useless and all it boils down to is scoring online points. 

      Neither party or Reform has our best interests at heart. Bottom line. My ultimate stance is that we need to be exploring other options (whether that be through voting for Lib Dems, Green or an independent candidate) and encouraging others to do so as well. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      WorkshyLayabout
      · 1 days ago
      @Gemma Jeremy Hunt's announcement was part of the Autumn statement in November 2023. 

      The only reason the Tories have a revolving door approach to their leaders while Labour has had the same person in charge for several years is because that he kicks anyone out of the party who does not agree with him.  

      "I also don't think it's productive to say that people who voted Labour should've known better." 

      Yet many of us did know how bad a Labour government would be. Both Reeves and Kendall, when in opposition, declared the benefits bill was too high, there were too many claiming benefits and reform was needed. There were those on this very website saying Labour in power would be a guaranteed disaster. Unfortunately there were those who did not heed these warnings and we are all paying the price. 

      "How were people to know they would come up with proposals that were just as bad?" 

      Because it was pointed out - repeatedly. 

      Labour’s manifesto of 136 pages had sweet f.a. about benefits. It did contain the sentence, "Our system will be underpinned by rights and responsibilities – people who can work, should work – and there will be consequences for those who do not fulfil their obligations.” Labour had no plans at all to help the sick and disabled get the benefits they rightly deserve. It was blatantly obvious before the election that Labour were to be as callous as the Tories. In fact, even more so.

      The Tories were constantly trying to cut benefits, but never during their 14 years in charge was there this amount of anger and upset.

      Labour, under Starmer, is a centre-right party. So are the Tories and Reform, but at least they openly admit it. 

      To end, a comment from nine months ago by Gabbie. "So scared that Labour will take my PIP away, it allows me to work part time and function with MS etc." Bang on the money, Gabbie.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      WorkshyLayabout
      · 2 days ago
      @Gemma I did reply to you, but it did not get published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Democratic backsliding
    · 3 days ago
    Whereabouts in Labour's election manifesto did they mention welfare reforms that will impoverish 400,000 disabled and vulnerable people?

    Saying one thing to get elected, then after elected doing another.

    Is that democratic? Where are the checks and balances?

    For that matter, where are the jobs? Are they creating new jobs besides more make-work job coaches?

    Are they building affordable housing? Are they stopping immigration?

    Abysmal.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Helen Galloway
    · 5 days ago
    I wouldn’t despair yet. Firstly I think there will be legal challenges delaying tactics . And having a background in managers just like Rachel and Liz . Any amount of posturing as Sgt Majors ordering people to do things they can’t doesn’t work and could be binned in the click of a finger. They are going to be faced with a whole load of problems they will have to deal with people with nowhere to go. It won’t be a success unfortunately it’s causing so much anguish at the same time. I’d quite like everyone to sue then and flood them with enquiries about their human rights and discrimination . It will have endless delays and problems. Things might never happen so unsettling as it is it’s best to just do what you can manage without damaging yourself with campaigns and things. . 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Gingin
    · 5 days ago
    A group of MPs on the All Party Parliamentary Group for Poverty and Inequality wants to hear your evidence before 14th April so they can issue a public response to the proposals. As in my previous post this group are united in their condemnation of the proposals. I know there are a lot of surveys and petitions, please would you take the time to send your response on this one: 

    https://appgpovertyinequality.org.uk/home-page/appg-on-poverty-and-inequality-call-for-evidence-inquiry-into-the-disproportionate-impact-of-poverty-and-inequality-on-disabled-people/
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      (No) hope
      · 4 days ago
      @Gingin How did you approach replying to this  consultation, just so I’m on the same page, and so that they will actually bother reading my input?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    rookie
    · 5 days ago
    Chilling stuff:

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Matt
    · 5 days ago
    Does anyone know in B & W when a vote is going to happen on these 'reforms'.

    As PIP reforms will require primary legislation, I am assuming that the first bit which will be used as a money bill is for the cut to UC health element.

    It would be very helpful for all of us here if we have an ide of the parliamentary timetable to enact these dreadful changes so that we can intensify the lobbying of politicians. Also, if you can, do vote on May 1st.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Neil Cook
      · 2 days ago
      @Matt He's intending to put these through via an Act of Parliament presumably so he can dodge anyone trying to hold them to account over this disgusting situation. And not a Statutory Instrument as is usually the case, I think.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon
    · 5 days ago
    Okay If that is the case then here is the Government website that links to starting an official petition. Though it would need the  kind permission of the Benefits and Work as well as people feeling okay with sharing their email addresses. 10,000 signatures gets an official Government response.  I leave it up to people who want to do this as everyone affected by these changes have the right to make up their own minds if they feel happy to start an official petition. . Thank you for your time.

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    gingin
    · 5 days ago
    After my email to the Carers APPG I just had a call from the person leading the media campaign for Carers UK against these welfare reforms, who invited me to be involved in some of their drives to speak to MP groups and speak to various media. Carers UK is trying to quickly launch a campaign against this and the more people that fill out their survey the better. It's lengthy but please do so if you can, and be as detailed as you can about how this affects you. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/2W82GT2
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Mick
      · 4 days ago
      @Gingin
      Sounds good, I might have been able to contribute after all if there was a choice given for what you could manage.

      Hopefully this gets massive attention and stops this in its tracks.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gingin
      · 5 days ago
      @Mick Hi Mick, they’ll contact me with each opportunity of engagement for me to make a decision whether to engage on a case by case basis. I want to as much as I can but it will obviously be with my husband’s consent, as he’s the person with the health condition. She said there might be opportunities to testify on committees directly to MPs or it might be print or tv interviews with media. She said many people want to do it anonymously which is their choice. Filling out the survey is very useful even if you don’t want to engage with the media stuff. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Mick
      · 5 days ago
      @gingin
      Are you going to go ahead and speak with them and get further involved gingin?

      I didn't agree to speak to them or get involved further when I filled in the survey, as I don't feel I am able to.  I wish I could though.

      Everything people here and across the various websites are saying about how this is going to affect them, from those on CB ESA, those only on LCWRA but not PIP, Veterans on War Pension like myself etc.  There are so many different cases and ways this is going to wreck people's lives or have knock on effects that simply aren't mentioned, clearly haven't been thought through or are being deliberately quietly ignored, no answers given anywhere about any of it.  All of this needs bringing to the forefront and putting in the faces of MP's, the media, advocates, charities, the public and everyone possible!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    gingin
    · 5 days ago
    Please please don't stop engaging with any efforts to fight this - petitions, demos, emailing MPs or All-Party Parliamentary Groups or anything else we can. I know a lot of us feel we've lost already but saying that repeatedly is only causing some people to give up trying. If there's any chance at all we can influence this process we should try! Those of us that can. Those of us don't feel able to, or just feel defeated, it's ok to say we're worried but maybe it would be better not to declare again and again that we've lost before we have. It doesn't help the rest of us who are trying to fight this!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon
      · 5 days ago
      @gingin I agree with you Gingin. You are 100% right.

      I am sorry for being defeatist. I was the one who led the comments here you are talking about.

      I agree with you 100% that we should all fight these reforms tooth and nail. There is still a chance that our pushback can mitigate this situation.

      FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      gingin
      · 5 days ago
      @Hightower Thanks Hightower, you’ve encouraged me back. I needed it today. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Hightower
      · 5 days ago
      @gingin Well said, gingin. I think you read the room well. People who come on this site are in despair. It’s hard to rally people into action when they’re licking their wounds. Your words do inspire hope though. You’ve definitely snapped me out it today. I think you should know, you,ve helped at least one person today. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Ann
      · 5 days ago
      @gingin Well said gingin. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    The Dogmother
    · 5 days ago
    Has anyone seen news of the House of lords committee agreeing to the Benefits changes.?
    I read a comment on Scope from someone stating this. But I can't find anything. My heads in a state all weekend so I can't really focus. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Anon
    · 5 days ago
    Hi All If it is okay with Benefits and Work Can anyone please sign this petition to oppose the proposed welfare changes that will impact on all disabled people. This petition needs to reach over 100,000 signatures for it to be debated in Parliament. Please sign this petition and ask your friends and anyone you know to help stop these unfair proposals.  All Disabled people need to be treated with respect in society . Thank You. 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jaded
      · 3 days ago
      @Anon Worth reposting this to as nany places as possible and frequently. The Change.org will be dismissed. Plus people who have already signed may not feel they need to sign another petition
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Anon
      · 4 days ago
      @James Correct. There must be a parliament petition which reaches 100,000. They will ignore the Change petition.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Hightower
      · 5 days ago
      @Anon Are you sure the change.org site for the petition is trustworthy, anon? They ask for money etc before letting you sign it?! Anyway they,re upto 47000 signatures so far…53000 to go! 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      george25
      · 5 days ago
      @Anon Signed as has family member 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Matt
      · 5 days ago
      @Anon I have already done so and forwarded it onto facebook in the hope others (preferably the able bodied) will sign it too.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    YogiBear
    · 5 days ago
    I'm starting to think it's a done deal. We just have to accept that it's happening. If any of the proposals in the Green Paper are binned or watered down we should take it as a win.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    ASC
    · 5 days ago
    Re the linking PIP to the LCWRA, surely someone has to realise that just because someone doesn't score 4pts they are able to work? I feel it will all go through but could be challenged in court, and the amount of tribunals...
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      welshval
      · 5 days ago
      @Frances Agree with you Frances it's a cost cutting exercise dressed up to appease anyone left in the Labour party with a conscience
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Frances
      · 5 days ago
      @ASC @ASC, it is an outrage to link pip to work at all, however, those losing lcwra would be placed in the lcw group in uc, so they would not actually be deemed 'fit for work'. The sneaky purpose of linking pip to universal credit is to deprive those without pip of the health element and so save the treasury money.

      There is no genuine plan for anyone be 'helped into work', that's just a nonsense cover story for cuts, the same as it was with the conservative consultation which was challenged by Ellen Clifford and the PLP and found unlawful.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Penny1949
    · 5 days ago
    STOP the new 4 point PIP rule Petition 

    Please, sign this petition now, please sign for the chronically ill, sign for fairness, and sign for justice


    We need 100,000 signatures and then this (legally) must be discussed in parliament. I am not trying to be our spokesperson but I am trying to u


    Remember, YOU, your family, friends, neighbours and co-workers CAN all sign this petition

    It is NOT acceptable to target a vulnerable community WE MUST SPEAK UP and be HEARD

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jono
      · 5 days ago
      @Penny1949 Signed 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      gingin
      · 5 days ago
      @Penny1949 Signed
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      (No) hope
      · 5 days ago
      @Penny1949 Absolutely correct. There are nearly 4 million of us on pip, surely we can make 100, 000 signatures? We need everyone to sign… really important. Don’t assume you’ll be okay after November 2026… and don’t give up either. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Harry
      · 5 days ago
      @Penny1949 Must be that many signing, the site has crashed.
      Message I got below I'll try again later

      This page isn’t working
      www.change.org is currently unable to handle this request.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Jon
      · 5 days ago
      @Penny1949 Change.org petitions DO NOT force a debate in parliament. No matter the amount of signees. Petitions posted on the official government website can but even that goes through a process. I understand the anxiety, believe me. But I don’t want people flooding to sign this, thinking they’re making a difference.

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

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

 
iContact

Latest news

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.

Ok Decline
More about cookies