Green Paper Discussion (from 24th March, 2025)
Comments
-
Obviously they would need to be trained and the culture would have to change. You can't have the culture we have currently with work coaches otherwise no one will qualify for disability. My thinking was it is better if the local work coaches in peoples own areas deal with claimants because circumstances in cities and rural areas are very different. Transport, finances, investment, jobs etc. That was my thinking. Personally I would not want to go to a work coach either, I get that. They would have to train people up to deal with disability if they are talking about reforming, that is what a reform should be shouldn't it?
2 -
Is it possible to divert the Trump posts here to the correct thread please.
4 -
Forgot to mention the £97 to £47 for LCWRA. That is another thing no one dares talk about it.
1 -
I don't disagree that the MSM can be biased, which is why it's good to read across the papers and compare sources. The only way you get to truth is by doing that. Believing in one person/politician uncritically is very dangerous. If you really support someone's way of doing things you should also be willing to hold them to account - otherwise you are only taking one side of the story as well.
And you shouldn't ever just rely on social media, because social media is far MORE biased and more of an echo chamber than the MSM. This is because of algorithms, which give you more posts similar to what you were already reading and reacts to what you like reading. It does not give you a balanced view, which is why you should use as many sources as possible to verify what is true.I didn't vote Labour and I am angry about what they are doing. At the same time, I realise that the Tories and Reform would do more harm to disabled people if they were in power, so it worries me when people think that getting rid of Labour would solve all our problems. It won't. We have very few positive options, politically, as disabled people.
I'm not going to comment on Trump because it's another country's politics. I also know people over there going through a very bad time/lost their job etc however.Apologies if that is still off topic but I feel like it's relevant in all the political frustration - remembering to check data and corroborate information across different sources no matter what the issue.
If anything, what we should be concerned about is how little MSM coverage there is now of the benefit cuts, as if it's someone else's problem and not as important as the financial implications of Trump's tariffs. These are all economic issues.
I do think that we should be challenging the idea of economically inactive as well. There is a difference between being not employed and not contributing to the economy. There will be further implications to cutting these payments if people are no longer to contribute to the economy by buying necessities and such. But there's nothing from the govt on that impact.3 -
26 years for me. When I was last in the job centre which was in around 2019, they said we have to do something about the massive gap in your CV, and they also said don't say at any job interviews that you've not been able to work for all these years because of being ill.
So, I guess I'm supposed to just lie at job interviews then and pretend I'm normal with no issues even though that's not true.
5 -
It seems like they may want us to lie but I will not do that.
I will be truthful and tell them I was granted early ill health retirement from my career because it was agreed that I am unable to undertake any paid employment
All reasonable adjustments were tried and failed
2 -
I'd feel like I'd have no choice but to lie because I guess if I told the truth it'd get back to the work coach and I'd be sanctioned.
A lot of people on here say if we're forced into jobs what employer would want to take us on since we're so ill? But I'm guessing the work coaches will expect you to play things down and pretend you're not that ill so you get the job, otherwise sanctioned.
0 -
Same here.
Medically retired, after all reasonable adjustments failed. No expectation I would be able to undertake gainful employment prior to retirement age.
Light touch review on PIP.
Support Group- NS-ESA.
I'd be equally humiliated and enraged if some 18yo, medically unqualified, 'Job Coach' was to attempt to tell me what jobs I could/should be doing.
Perhaps that's their aim?
To humiliate us into stopping claiming our current benefits?
3 -
What you've said is spot on @noonebelieves 👌👏💪
1 -
After all the posts about Trump, that have appeared on the Green Paper Discussion thread, may I make a suggestion that a separate thread could be created for news and current affairs that would be general and not related to our benefits and all the issues they raise? 🤔
4 -
when I’m cured by the DWP I’m going to be a firefighter, can’t wait.
4 -
I delved into the ‘Pathways to work green paper’ further and came across a particular point that raised some concerns.So I thought to look into it further….
In the introduction(scroll down), point 194 states:
“Data on economic inactivity published in January 2025 by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) demonstrates that many people who are economically inactive due to long-term sickness want to work, with nearly 700,000 stating they would like a job.”
This figure of 700,000 is attributed to the ONS, as indicated in footnote 90. However, upon reviewing the available ONS data, I couldn’t locate this specific statistics-How did they arrive at that figure?. This raises questions about the accuracy and source of this figure, especially considering the significant implications it has for the 16 million disabled individuals in the UK 😡😡
The Green Paper frequently references the Labour Force Survey (LFS) and another interim findings of a “work aspirations and support needs of health and disability customers”
(Interim Report on merely a survey of 3,401 health and disability customers 🙄.”)
-I couldn’t see a ‘moral’ argument here at all, using data from 3,401 people to cut disability benefits for 16 million people.
Both of the above are used as foundational data sources throughout this long-form Green Paper document (which you would truly need a month to read!!).
I’m unsure if this is captured in our green paper thread so far
but
- I feel it’s important to note that the LFS has faced challenges regarding data reliability. The Office for Statistics Regulation highlighted that several statistical outputs derived from the LFS had their accreditation suspended due to quality concerns stemming from declining survey response rates. I also read that they advised caution when using this data, emphasising its limitations. You can see it all here (in their note mentioning the time constraints ), Rising ill-health and economic inactivity because of long-term sickness -again in the notes and the caution note(Bolded) in the Employment/Unemployment/Economic inactivity Estimates (point 2) here . These caution notes are on pretty much all of the data on which they’ve based this proposal.
Half of the links they have added as references in the green paper are broken links (as they have clearly rushed to publish this). Just analysing the rushed green paper proposal makes my blood boil. 😡Given these points, i feel that the justification for the ‘Pathways to Work’ Green Paper may be based on data that is not entirely reliable. This brings into question the validity of the proposals and also suggests that they might be founded on potentially flawed or misleading information.
I feel it deserves the statement of the Benefits and Work organisation as a ‘Bogus Consultation.’ 👍👍I personally find the green paper proposal senseless, purposefully long and vague, purposefully delaying accessibility, confusing, statistically incorrect, non-reliable, misleading, flawed, and based on extremely ‘volatile’ data.”
I encourage others to review these findings and share their perspectives. If these assumptions hold, it could raise significant concerns about the foundation of the Green Paper’s proposals and provide a strong basis to fight against the benefit cuts within the legal system.(Evidently, I truly feel this consultation has been so rushed -it’s still without an accessible version, as if all its flaws and cracks were meant to go unnoticed. We must leave no stone unturned and hold them to account. We can highlight these issues when responding to the consultation. They need to witness the collective power of 16 million people.)
I was genuinely shocked to see that the Green Paper PDF is 84 pages long. It really makes me wonder….did they ever stop to consider how this would affect disabled and vulnerable people trying to engage with it?
5 -
@jul1aorwaysThank you my friend . I’m back on track on this 84 page long green paper of “Liebour” govt. Pls have a look at my post below🤷🏻♂️
1 -
Thank You @noonebelieves I've read your post but need to re read it to assimmilate it properly (my mind not your post which is very well written).
Wasn't sure exactly where to put this and didnt know how to save/upload it, but there's an article from interview with Rachel Reeves this week ? Weds, on Disability News Service by John Pring that I've just seen where RR connecting PIP reassessments with opening up work/employment support.
0 -
@Martinp & @Girl_No1 , well, there you go, your “Right to Work” guarantee is alive and kicking (check out point 192!
As for me, I’ve apparently been “matched” to train as a traffic warden yes, really. This from my work coach who knows full well that I have mobility issues and a history of falls. Makes perfect sense, doesn’t it?
At this rate, I’ll be patrolling double yellows with a rollator and a panic alarm. Can’t wait.
4 -
The user and all related content has been deleted.1
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.3
-
I agree we have to unite. It should be the disabled and vulnerable in any society who receive the most help. We all agree on this point. The government haven't said which conditions will be exempt from having to look for work and which won't.
It should not be about the disability but how it affects daily life I think we all agree on that too.
So many people have more than one condition to deal with and an accumulation of many condtions have an overall debilitating affect.
Take my conditions Severe Arthritis combined with Fibro and trimenigal neuralgia and diverticulitis, IBD and hypothyroidism and Kidney issues as an example should qualify but we don't know if it will. I am in a wheelchair due to constant pain and weakness in my legs. I was on enforced bedrest for months due to a tear in my bowel which was slow to heal and numerous infections including an antibiotic resistant one. It is a combination of my conditions which causes me to be disabled and I scored over 4 on 2 descriptors on my last assessment as well as lower scores on others I was on indefinite award on DLA and given a ten year award on PIP in 2019..
If I lose PIP I lose LCWRA and also my husband who is my carer will lose his allowance and have to return to work we will have no choice which would mean me missing hospital and doctors and physio appointments as he would have to work mon-fri 9-5 and not able to take care of me at all during the day. I already feel a burden to my family. Living with constant pain is exhausting it is soul destroying at times. I have children including one with acute leukaemia, so carry on for their sakes but I would never want them to have to take care of me. I am only in my 40's and I am so worried I just cannot sleep at night and it is unforgivable for the government to do this to vulnerable people to make them sick with worry like this and I cannot help but feel there are evil intentions behind all of this that they see us as a burden to society and not as worthy as somebody able to work.
Sorry for the long post but I just feel so overwhelmed right now as do many of us and don't know what to do.
4 -
Hi @gamer1 ,
Many thanks for reaching out to my post. I completely agree with you. Like you, I have voiced my concerns not only on Scope but across several platforms regarding these reforms. I am absolutely furious about the proposed cuts and the introduction of the 4-point PIP daily living criteria.
What I was trying to convey earlier is that some of the comments in the debate were getting too heated, and I was concerned about the upset it might cause to our co-members, myself included, just reading through some of them. I understand the intentions were to debate the policy, but given the volatility of this senseless proposal, those messages could be perceived differently.
Ok, Coming back to the PIP debate-My views are :
This whole rushed proposal, at its core, seems to be built on cost-saving motives. Raising the PIP threshold to 4 points would exclude so many people and drastically reduce costs. This, in turn, would almost make it a jackpot for them. If they abolish the WCA, and someone doesn’t meet the PIP criteria but can’t work due to their disabilities for whatever reason, they’d be left with minimal disability support. With no health element or LCWRA, due to the abolition of WCA, they’d receive next to nothing.
It’s a clever but deeply unethical game plan by the Labour government, thinking it is moral to make such cuts. That’s all I wanted to get off my chest. I’m back on track now.
3
Categories
- All Categories
- 16.2K Start here and say hello!
- 7.6K Coffee lounge
- 116 Games den
- 1.8K People power
- 171 Announcements and information
- 25.4K Talk about life
- 6.1K Everyday life
- 399 Current affairs
- 2.5K Families and carers
- 884 Education and skills
- 2K Work
- 597 Money and bills
- 3.8K Housing and independent living
- 1.2K Transport and travel
- 665 Relationships
- 1.6K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.6K Talk about your impairment
- 882 Rare, invisible, & undiagnosed conditions
- 943 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.3K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.3K Autism and neurodiversity
- 41.2K Talk about your benefits
- 6.2K Employment & Support Allowance (ESA)
- 20.4K PIP, DLA, ADP & AA
- 9.3K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.4K Benefits and income