The Green Paper Discussion (the document link is here too!)
Comments
-
That won't happen. It would require most Labour MPs to go against their leader, which they won't do. Most Labour MPs—especially new ones—are loyalist doormats.
which is also ironic as that scheme will fail too because most abled British people simply don't want to do bricklaying and similar manual jobs. The pay is ****, they offer minimal career progression. Moreover, manual labour jobs will wreck people's bodies and force an early retirement (and given governments keep raising the retirement age, effectively forces people into destitution in their middle age).
The only way ableds, especially British people, will take up apprenticeships like bricklaying is through abuse and coercion. The same techniques the Tories use against disabled people.
0 -
That's a select committee is one of many governmental bodies made up of MPs across all parties meant to scrutinise government policies. Their webpage is here:
Work and Pensions Committee - Summary - Committees - UK Parliament
As for writing to MPs, you can write to any MP - they can't stop you from doing so. However, only your local MP can take on your case on your constituency level. If you write to any other MP, they are allowed to not respond.
However, in cases like select committees or ministers, you are allowed to contact them in that capacity if they're not your local MP.
1 -
Hi Catherine, I’m tired of this government for months I’ve been stressed like many others, hopefully you will get your asd assessment soon, do you keep ringing to chase it up? I’m ok thank you, how are you?
0 -
From Benefits and Work site
Labour risks PIP cuts vote in order to breach claimants’ human rights
Published: 22 March 2025
Labour is prepared to risk a backbench revolt by allowing a vote on cuts to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), in order to be sure it can breach claimants’ human rights without worrying about legal repercussions, Benefits and Work believes.
When the Pathways to Work Green paper was published, it contained the surprising information that the changes to PIP scores and the cuts to universal credit (UC) payments would be introduced by primary legislation – an Act of Parliament.
Surprising, because these changes would normally be done using Statutory Instruments (SIs). This is delegated legislation that does not require a vote in Parliament, just a signature from the secretary of state.
A vote carries real risks.
Given that the Tories will undoubtedly be in favour of the cuts, the risk is not that Labour might lose the vote.
But if a sizeable number of backbenchers revolt, real damage may be done to the Labour leadership and to party cohesion. A large enough uprising might even threaten the careers of Reeves or Kendall – perhaps even be the beginning of the end for Starmer himself .
In the face of overwhelming discontent, it seems likely Labour would abandon the whole plan rather than risk a showdown.
SIs, on the other hand, are extremely difficult to get a ballot on in Parliament. There is a process whereby MPs can “pray against” an SI and potentially vote on it. But it is a complex and seldom successful process. The last time an SI was overturned in this way in the Commons was almost half a century ago.
So, why give MPs and Lords a vote on a highly controversial issue when it isn’t at all necessary?
The argument that it is being done in the interests of democracy is not one that can be taken seriously. Not when Labour have refused to consult with the public, and particularly disabled claimants, over these changes which will have such a dramatic effect on their lives.
But there is a more obvious reason.
SIs can be challenged in court, usually by judicial review, and have some of their provisions removed or the entire instrument quashed. The Human Rights Act is often the basis of such challenges.
In truth, successful challenges are very rare.
One study found that between 2014 and 2020 there were just 14 successful challenges of delegated legislation using the Human Rights Act, in spite of thousands of SIs being enacted every year.
It’s worth noting, though, that four of those cases were in connection with regulations made under the Welfare Reform Act 2012.
The situation is very different where an Act of Parliament, rather than an SI, is involved.
In the UK, parliament is sovereign. Because an act has gone through the whole extensive democratic process of scrutiny and debate by both the Commons and the Lords, courts cannot overturn the provisions of an Act of Parliament.
The most they can do is inform the government that particular provisions of an act are in breach of, for example, the Human Rights Act or the Equality Act.
But the government does not have to do anything about the court’s findings. It can simply shrug its shoulders and carry on regardless.
Benefits and Work suspects that the DWP have very strong grounds to fear that both the changes to the PIP points system and the cuts to the LCWRA element of UC are in breach of the Human Rights Act and/or the Equality Act.
And that, we believe, is why they are to be made law via a single Act of Parliament that the courts can’t touch.
Once again, we remind readers that In the Green paper, the DWP claim that “We are committed to putting the views and voices of disabled people and people with health conditions at the heart of everything we do.”
Disabled people’s human rights, on the other hand, can be safely ignored.
Visit our What you can do page for at least eight actions you can take right now to challenge the Green Paper.
https://www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/news/labour-risks-pip-cuts-vote-in-order-to-breach-claimants%E2%80%99-human-rights
2 -
Only our medical evidence and what more we can beg from doctors. For people, with very longterm conditions, I always recommend they obtain all relevant records dromedary their GP and hospitals. However old, it helps build a case.
1 -
These reforms can be challenged in many ways and have a long way to go yet, even if it's fast tracked for legistation.
- Judicial Review – Courts can review whether the reforms comply with constitutional or legal principles, including human rights protections. If a law is passed too quickly without proper scrutiny, it may be challenged for procedural irregularities.
- Human Rights Challenges – If the reforms violate human rights laws (such as the European Convention on Human Rights in the UK), they can be challenged in domestic courts or even at the European Court of Human Rights.
- Legislative Opposition – Opposition parties, committees, or members of parliament can try to amend or repeal the reforms in future sessions, especially if public opposition grows.
- Public and Political Pressure – Advocacy groups, unions, charities, and the public can challenge welfare reforms through protests, petitions, and lobbying efforts, potentially leading to reconsideration or modifications.
- International Legal Mechanisms – If the reforms breach international commitments (such as UN conventions on poverty, disability rights, or children’s rights), they can be challenged through international legal bodies.
Even fast-tracked laws must follow due process, and if they don’t, there are legal and political avenues to challenge them.
2 -
absolutely @Catherine21 ,I never claimed benefits before or even understood the system.I was so used to working hard. But ever since I became unable to work due to my disabilities and had to rely on benefits, I haven’t had a single day of peace. I live in constant fear, and with the recent Green Paper announcements and the rhetoric surrounding them, that fear has only grown. The entire employment and benefits system feels broken and non-inclusive.
2 -
You know one thing I’ve always thought would really help, although I know in terms of logistics it would be very hard to realistically implement, is to have PIP assessors experienced in applicant’s conditions. (Or one of their conditions if they’re applying with multiple.)
Think about how much easier it would be if your assessor had specific knowledge in your disability, instead of the current system where it just seems to be completely random.
When I first applied for PIP i got scored 0 on everything. I had explained thoroughly that there are a lot of things that I struggle to do because of the fatigue I experience due to my SMIs (severe mental illness), but the assessor “decided” that wasn’t true because “I’m not diagnosed with any conditions that cause fatigue”.
Then at tribunal I had a doctor who was AMAZING. He had a lot of expertise in psychiatry and actually realised and understood my difficulties, and I got scored accordingly.Again I do understand that the logistics of trying to get an assessor with specific expertise to be available to assess a claimant with a certain diagnosis but like… it WOULD be possible.
I mean can you think of any other job where that would be appropriate? It would be like a university professor teaching a nursery class, or vice verse. Yes they have the same baseline educational knowledge but everything else is completely different. They are dealing with two totally separate groups of people with separate needs who require the expertise of someone specifically trained in working with them.
That would rightly be seen as nonsensical, so why isn’t this?2 -
Gee, thanks for the good news made me feel so much better😕
0 -
Same here.
I worked most of my adult life until I became too unwell to continue.
Fed up with the constant fear and derogatory labelling of the dissabled community by the media and certain sections of society.
I am not a benefit scrounger or lazy work shy.
I worked very hard in a professional career and paid into the system yet now I am viewed as a useless waste of space nobody in society.
3 -
The new reforms of combining PIP and LCWRA is the most stupid thing I have ever seen from a government. Firstly it doesn't make sense because PIP is NOT a disability benefit but a add on for those that need aid with their independence living with disability. SECONDLY EVERYONE on LCWRA should be technically getting some sort of support from PIP because LCWRA! is the disability benefit. And now they are combining both, how do they know how many of those on LCWRA alone also meet requirement for PIP but are not claiming because they didn't know or were to scared before.
You could have a situation where people are getting even more money than before and government losing out because they have not anticipated how many people actually meet the requirement for PIP and are not claiming it.
Exactly how many people are they planning on removing from benefits? Because if the number is half of the people, then the other half will receive PIP and it it won't make a difference. They will still be spending around the same. It is the most stupid thing I have ever heard of.
Also they have now by advertising the reforms on national television on every platform made sure MORE PEOPLE will now know about disability benefit AND WILL APPLY. It is the most stupid thing I have ever seen and doesn't not make sense at all.
3 -
But it's saying it can't be changed? Am I missing something
0 -
IIt's awful so so overwhelming me too worked care profession I'm so tired of it all your right not oneday of any happiness just pure dread first Conservatives then uc which still waiting for the dread of checking accounts to this who would choose this and they pushed it through parliament
1 -
AAh all over the place like us all your right since sunak speech 2023 been hell I hope you have a peaceful day
1 -
Starmer won't back down he will spend millions fighting
1 -
It's true, this is terrorising us. I can't stay 10 minutes without this terror coming on to my mind..
0 -
You shouldn't have told this cruel dishonest and terrorising system that you've 14k.
0 -
Has he ever said he worked for DWP ?
Interesting to know and at what level.
I know he regularly says he knows folk who work for them and they email him,
1 -
But if I hadn't I would have been prosecuted for fraud
0 -
I know it can be confusing, I was the same until I looked into it, it can be even more confusing when stressed out, tired, conflicting comments on here, and in the media. The bottom line is, YES these reforms can be pushed through and fast tracked into legistation, but can still be challenged if deemed to discriminate or breach our human rights, which they no doubt do.
There could be a judicial review if it's passed (unlikely) which would delay it again by months or over a year until heard in court. It could go to the High court, or supreme court of appeal, which could delay by years, which in that time unlikely Labour will be voted in again. Other political parties like maybe Reform or Tories would no doubt have their own welfare reforms, but the same thing would happen again with appeals etc.
Beleive me, there is a long way to go yet, I know we are all in mass panic and under loads of stress, wondering what's going on behind the scenes, if we're being listetend to!! I can assure you we have plenty of support from lots of people who are looking at ways to defeat these cuts, or delay them from happening.
5
Categories
- All Categories
- 14.8K Start here and say hello!
- 7K Coffee lounge
- 78 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 93 Announcements and information
- 23K Talk about life
- 5.4K Everyday life
- 216 Current affairs
- 2.3K Families and carers
- 850 Education and skills
- 1.8K Work
- 486 Money and bills
- 3.5K Housing and independent living
- 972 Transport and travel
- 674 Relationships
- 65 Sex and intimacy
- 1.4K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 853 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 911 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 37.6K Talk about your benefits
- 5.8K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 7.4K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.4K Benefits and income