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.
    · 10 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.
    · 10 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.
      · 9 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.
      · 10 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.
    · 10 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.
      · 9 days ago
      @Penny1949 Signed 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @Penny1949 Signed
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 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.
      · 9 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.
      · 9 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.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    STOP the new 4 point PIP rule Petition 

    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 unite us. We need to raise our voices

    The Government must reconsider this change. We MUST protect the most vulnerable among us and ensure their dignity through compassionate support. Therefore, we need to urge our Government to reassess this new rule.


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    Just leaving a comment here to let you know that you aren't alone in your despair and anger.

    We will survive one way or another.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    Nowadays, no one can claim Jobseekers' Allowance for an unlimited period of time until they get an employment. You can only claim Jobseekers' Allowance (nicknamed these days as, New Style Jobseeker's Allowance) for a maximum of 182 days (approximately six months).

    And guess what! These days, many claimants are sanctioned before they even get their first payment, leave alone hanging on their Jobseekers' Allowance.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    All I wanna say is that they don’t really care about us …
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    "By linking PIP assessments to LCWRA and abolishing WCA people are going to lose LCWRA, the people who will lose the LCWRA will be expected to partake in training or job searching for a non-existent job which even if it existed you won't get when an employer would rather hire someone fit and able."

    So disabled people who won't qualify for the PIP/LCWRA will be stuck in a doom loop being expected to look for something that isn't there in order to keep a hold of their benefits.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Frances Less money though isn't it...that does not make it right
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @tintack Exactly.

      They love WCA for 'off-flows'.

      They scrap WCA for 'on-flows'.

      The entire reforms are about saving money - nothing else.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @Frances No but you lose £400 and odd quid in the process. And THAT is what matters, and is the whole point to this, for Labour, the saving. They ain't interested if you get a job or not and are quite happy for you to sit in the LCW. But you've saved them £416 in the process.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @Jamie Not sure about substantial risk, but as I understand it the WCA rule changes proposed by the Tories have been scrapped, so any WCA reassessments should take place under the same system in place now. True, they're probably hoping that some people will be deemed fit for work and not appeal it, but someone who has medical evidence that they qualify for LCWRA under the present WCA system should still do so, even if they need to appeal it to get the right decision. It's still a rotten system of course - why ramp up reassessments using an assessment system which they say is so flawed they're going to scrap it? Utterly absurd.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Dave Dee My whole post was

      You have overlooked lcw, which does not require looking for work, only engaging in work related activity appropriate to your capacity. Not ideal by any means, but not quite the 'doom loop'. It is not automatic to go straight from lcwra to job seeker.

      It is important to oppose the green paper proposals, but also not to exaggerate the impacts, because to do that undermines authoritative criticism. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    The PIP and Universal Credit changes are a done deal if Labour seek to make the changes primary legislation and we know that the Tories will vote it through with them as it greases the slope for more cuts if or when the Tories go back into government.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    "Nearly half of all companies are cutting recruitment because of Rachel Reeves' hike in National Insurance, research suggests."


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    Reading the latest comments I feel down and tempted to give up. But if we give up they’ve already won. So I’m going to carry on raising my voice about this with anyone who’ll listen. It’s all I can do. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Gingin Do not give up ....that's what they want you to do. x
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Gingin I know how you feel, there seems to be a lot of negative words being posted but I'm keeping a positive state of mind and hoping that the charities and campaigners which are on our side and fighting for us will come up trumps in the end. We mustn't give up hope. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    What happens if a disabled person tries working and then gets fired for inadequate performance?

    Sanctioned, homeless, and disabled?

    Why is Reeves always grinning and smirking recently.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Ilo A person who is dismissed or made redundant from a job can claim jobseeker's allowance immediately but not claim for several weeks or months if he/she walked out.     
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @WorkshyLayabout Do you? I thought you couldn't claim for 3 months if you are sacked
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Scorpion Their voice coaches need sacking...Reeves is like some mechanical robot, Keir sounds like a stuck record and Liz just comes across as unhinged
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Scorpion No, they are robots.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Anon Because she has rescued her job at the expense of disabled people and people with long-term health conditions to please the Treasury.

      K. Starmer, R. Reeves, and L. Kendall are all faking their smile, as they've had voice coaches who have trained them.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    Hope people don't vote labour , reform,Tories in the may elections they don't care about disabled people ect they are cruel if labour lose lots seats they'll not have enough of their own mayor's or councillors these are the people they were going to use to get Britain working again dont know if they will use the Tories or reform ect ones  if labours mayor's councillors are voted out think it would send a big message to labour even if they ignore people now they'll want to stay in power next general election can't do that if not enough votes they think they control everyone but the public control them with votes .
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 days ago
      @Lill Well I have decided I’m defacing my voting slip 🫣😂 no one is getting my vote, none deserve a single vote. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    We all know the jobs for disabled people are few and far between.  It's about cutting disabled people's benefit money. It's got nothing to do with helping them into employment. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Yup The only updates my CV is getting:

      * Not well enough to work
      * A health and safety risk
      * Send corpse to DWP if I die at my desk

      I'm not joking.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @WorkshyLayabout I'm sure they will want to fill our long gaps in employment with courses. For our CV's. Well I wont be lying on mine, however much they try to bully us. My health issues will be my CV.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @DT Obviously there is a "to" missing in the first sentence.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @DT These are the types of people employers do not want employ : 

      1.) Someone sick.
      1.) Someone disabled.
      1.) Someone long-term unemployed. 
      1.) Someone who will need time off work.
      1.) Someone with no skills.

      Notice they are all 1.) as none is less important than the others.

      Safe to assume the list describes many of us. 


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    The committee inquiry is just a parliamentary formality. It has no powers to exercise any change.

    They previously had an inquiry about safeguarding vulnerable claimants. Did anything happen following that? No.

    Nobody is coming to save us.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Anon No it's not irrelevant.  It is a chance for the issues we are worried about being discussed within parliament.  That means however many people on the committee will see evidence of the devastation this might cause.  They might then talk to other MPs about it, or the media might get hold of any report, binding or not, that comes from the inquiry.  ANY airing of these issues in parliament or public is a GOOD thing, whether they have direct powers to change or not.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Slb But they have no powers to exercise any change.

      So.... it's 100% irrelevant.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Anon If it was a formality, we'd have known it was going to happen.  We didn't, therefore it's voluntary and driven by  concerns.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    What powers do the committee have to exercise following this?

    None? Exactly.

    We are toast.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    Not at all surprising the alarm bells are going off at a Work and Pensions Committee. They've clearly taken one look at this Green Paper and wondered where on earth you're going to find vacancies for all of the claimants that are gonna be kicked off their benefits and will be flooding the job market.

    You can say that you'll "support" disabled individuals into work until you're blue in the face. You can even take a disabled person by the hand, walk them into a place of business and demand to speak to the manager. It won't matter. There just aren't enough vacancies out there as it is and adding millions and millions of disabled people to the mix who are desperate for money is certainly going to be mayhem.

    In fact, it'll become so desperate that it might very well be dystopian. I wouldn't be at all shocked if we have more cases of modern day slavery and exploitation showing up in the coming years because people will do just about anything to survive. 

    Of course, I don't think this Committee actually care cares about all this because I personally have no faith in these governmental departments. They're only hosting this inquiry because what I've described above is going to be a huge headache for them that their higher ups in the actual government will not have to deal with and they're not willing to play ball. Let's just hope they cannibalise each other trying to palm off the responsibility. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 10 days ago
    I’m afraid I don’t buy it - if they wanted to address the issues then they would open up and listen to the experts and claimants themselves. This just seems to me like a “no look we checked it’s all fine” bit of drama. Labour avoided this topic ever since Sunak said “I don’t believe Britain is sicker than a decade ago” - despite every available measure disproving that. Labour said nothing. They didn’t put anything in their manifesto, they’ve avoided the topic and they’ll push through no matter what - they’ve made that clear by how they’re trying to dodge the human rights and discrimination challenges the changes would (rightly) get. 

    “For the many not the few” is just a slogan, their actions show who they really are and what they really care about, and it isn’t us. It’s trying to prove that they can save more money than the Tories, no matter what the human cost. 

    I stand by my position that a 1% tax on the super rich for 1 year only - raising appropriately £6bn would sure things up so they can scrap these plans and take the slow approach that should be taken when dealing with welfare changes. It’s like surgery, one wrong slip and people die, so you need experts and all the information possible. The super rich wouldn’t suffer and die losing 1% for one year - disabled people will if they lose 100% forever. 

    You can’t shift the goalposts and say “you were sick enough for financial help yesterday, but you’re not today despite the fact you haven’t changed”. 

    These cuts are cruel, openly discriminatory and they will kill. But they’ll push them through anyway. I don’t know anyone who’s not scared right now - and rightly so. Unless we can make our voices loud and heard, we stand no chance of stopping them. 

    I have chronic pain, I won’t be affected by these cuts as I score 4 points, but my friend will - and he’ll lose his home. The future has never been more terrifying, courtesy of Labour and the DWP. 

    Anyone supporting this should bow their head in shame - this is eugenics by economics and nothing more. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 11 days ago
    I'm only presuming there are people here who have seen this all before under different government's in the past, how ultimately will all of this play out?

    Will Labour pass everything? Will Labour's plans get watered down? Can money orientated legislation get challenged in court? 

    What are the gut feelings?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @rookie They recently announced they re stopping accepting cash. Google it.

      Having a finite amount of cash won't guarantee survival.

      1. It will run out.
      2. It won't be accepted in supermarkets.
      3. You can't pay rent with it.
      4. It creates a serious liability.

      It's not a solution to anything.

      Survival depends on receiving a regular, legal, income deposited to your bank account, which is large enough to cover your rent and food and other expenses.

      The only ways to get this are:

      1. A full time job.
      2. LCWRA and PIP.
      3. Self-employment.

      They are removing option 2 for most disabled people.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 days ago
      @rtbcpart2 What his mattress? :D
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Anon If cash in the mattress wont save you can I have yours?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Anon @Anon, of course supermarkets take cash. If you're paying for stuff with cash you'll be able to answer the questions.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 days ago
      @Anon I have absolutely no idea where you shop, but every shop near me takes cash, including all supermarkets.   And who said they would be large cash withdrawals?  I am perfectly within my rights to take money out of my own bank account.   There is no way that they can question reasonable sums of money being withdrawn in cash.  We have every right to pay for items how we want.   Really, I understand why people are being pessimistic, but there's no need to constantly put problems in the way when there are none. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 11 days ago
    I have said it over and over AGAIN on this site that WE all will be losers if these cuts go ahead. It is as simple as that. FACT!

    It does NOT matter, whether you are a pensioner, young middle aged or old. 

    I was yesterday feeling a little uplifted by the work and pensions committee Green paper inquiry.

    Only today to have learnt another revelation from Kendall! This time consultations behind ALL of our backs AGAIN have been on-going with Health Secretary Wes Streeting, and certain GP Practices up and down the Country for quite some time.

    Whereby, GP's instead of writing a fit note/sick note they are to actually refer people to employment support. This has been going on jointly already with some GP's. 

    This is further going to be looked into by John Lewis boss Charlie Mayfield. Who will carry out the reviews.  Kendall states/affirms that work is already going on behind the scenes. Behind our backs again, without any consultation AGAIN to us those of us that this will impact.

    As such people with disabilities, long term sick We NEED medical support from our GP's NOT our GP's then to send to Employment Support. 

    Therefore, I am sorry to have to say this but I hope, you have confidence in your GP, because right now I do NOT with how my GP practice is run. Business Decisions are overriding Clinical Decisions. 

    At the moment we are protected by LWC or the support group on ESA.

    Now do you get WHY they want to abolish LWC and it's equivalent on ESA.?

    Honestly, the ONLY hope we have is FOR this bill to be abolished, as such they already have been exploring the proposals with the people who are supposed to understand the needs of people who are currently out of work. We just have NOT been made aware of it, until 3 April 2025!

    Fact IS there are NO realistic plans 'to drive a revolution in disabled people's employment opportunities' 

    This has NOT been about work reform, in my opinion, whatsoever, it is about the Government saving money and to recoup the money they have spent since being in power for short period of time and GUESS WHAT as sick and disabled people we have been the ones chosen to be their scapegoat.

    Those work coaches they are talking about. They have NOT recruited anymore, INDEED there has been mass shortage of work coaches as they are all leaving. 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

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

 
iContact