New Green Paper Discussion - now includes accessible formats and consultation event sign up links!
Comments
-
good on you , the truth is who can we vote for ? nobody is worthy I think they're all the same .
1 -
Your post really stood out to me. I've always been interested in political history, especially from the Victorian and Edwardian periods, so hearing about your great-grandfather’s role in Labour’s early days is fascinating.
His role as one of the first Labour town councillors in 1913, before Labour’s rise to prominence, is a remarkable piece of history. It highlights the early struggles of working-class voices gaining influence in local politics, even before the Representation of the People Act in 1918. That era proved that people were not going away; they refused to be silenced, carving out a space in politics that would shape all our futures.
While Labour today may seem alien to its original mission, the spirit of grassroots movements and working-class advocacy remains alive in communities and individuals pushing for change.
Your act of protest through your ballot is a powerful way to honour that legacy and show that your voice still matters. By doing this, you are making a statement – you are saying, "I came to the ballot box today to show I do not agree with any of this."
That spirit is timeless. Change takes time, but the fight for representation and justice continues. In your own small way, you are still part of that, and your great-grandfather would be proud of your commitment to the ideals he stood by over a hundred years ago.
3 -
Apart from a very few exceptions, Politicians are self important narcissists. I watched the Business Secretary on tv and what a jumped up little man he is, pretending to be a solicitor. I really wouldn’t trust any of them, is this the best this country has to offer. Our future is in the hands of incompetent and corrupt people, they demonise us yet take more in freebies and benefits than we ever could. They should be ashamed but they aren’t which tells you everything really.
I hope everyone is as ok as you can be, God bless
4 -
Totally agree, @Catherine21👍
There’s been so much exclusion, sidelining, and discrimination faced by disabled and vulnerable people throughout this Green Paper process-including the consultation itself.
Even with my half-cooked brain, I’m putting together a short template that links our experiences with the Equality Act 2010. Once it’s done, I’ll share it here. I’m planning to use it as part of my reason for opposing the Green Paper proposal.
And yes-like you said, let’s all push back with truth and unity.(aka throwing eggs at their face!!🥚🐣)Let’s stand up for our rights together.
In solidarity ✌️1 -
I was just wondering how Kendall would treat a disabled constituent that has a face to face meeting. Let’s just say this disabled constituent has lost their home and is now in extreme poverty. I can just see Kendall arriving in the office, putting her broomstick to one side and then laughing at the disabled person saying “It was my moral duty to make you homeless and place you in extreme Poverty, Everything I do, I do for your benefit and future prosperity, you should be grateful, now stop pretending and go out and get a job”.
1 -
"The most harmful proposals are being introduced instead in the new government bill, without any consultation." - From Disability News Service. Legal action against primary legislation leads into mirky waters, most of the main legal actions will be taken against the Green Paper/White Paper.
Labour sees the cuts sans Green Paper as a "halfway house" because they knew legal advice and or action will be taken.
So what is the end goal? where does this saga lead to? PIP changes and WCA abolished, then what of the Green Paper? Disabled people will STILL lose eligibility regardless of the Green Paper.
0 -
Thankyou, well said, I honestly found the comments about Catherines writing quite offensive especially on a forum designed for sick/disabled people with a multitude of issues who struggle with different things. I just hope she's not too offended or upset by those comments.
2 -
Does it really matter that much to you? Youv'e been asked by Holly at Scope to stop correcting people, especially Catherine, telling her to use commas and full stops etc. Regardless of if you mean well or not, it;s not right to make others feel bad on here just because it annoys you. If it does annoy you try being a bit more tactful please or your posts will get flagged by others on here, like myself. I hope my use of commas and fullstops was sufficient for you.
4 -
Hope your day is going well so far. I’ve been following your posts closely to gain some background and insight, and I just want to say as an add on to yesterday -ever since you joined this thread, you’ve brought so much hope and renewed strength. You’ve genuinely made many of us feel more empowered to stand up for our rights and pursue justice through every channel available-be it petitions, campaigns, or contacting MPs. I can certainly sense a uplifting spirit in our communities . Thank you for that.
I know we shouldn’t make assumptions, and I really don’t want to put you on the spot-but your thoughtful posts suggest a solid understanding of the legal side of things. So I hope it’s okay for me to ask something I’ve been thinking a lot about.
From everything I’ve read(pathways to work Green Paper)and experienced, it seems very clear to me that the government’s proposals present serious concerns—potential breaches of the Equality Act 2010, and what feels like an increasingly hostile and exclusionary environment for disabled and vulnerable people. The consultation process, as it stands, feels inaccessible and performative—certainly not a genuine, inclusive consultation in any meaningful sense.
This brings me to my question:
I strongly believe that if we all respond directly to the consultation via the official email route (rather than using the MS Forms link-which, for me, is a definite no-pls see below ), and clearly set out our reasons for opposing the proposal-along with the potential impact it could have on us, our families, and our children if it goes ahead-it could carry far greater legal and political weight. My concern is that if we don’t take this direct route, the government may later claim there was no significant opposition during the consultation process, which could allow the proposals to proceed without being properly challenged.
(I don’t feel comfortable using the MS Forms link set up by the government, as there’s a risk they might dismiss the responses-especially given how the questions are framed, which feel more like traps or setups designed to lead people into agreeing with the proposals.)
To be clear, I’m not suggesting people stop engaging with campaigns, petitions, MP etc-that work is extremely vital and so powerful!
I’m just wondering if direct email responses to the official consultation inbox might give us a first hand edge in making our collective voices impossible to ignore.Do you think this understanding holds any water , even though my knowledge is self-taught and nowhere near legal standard? Have there been similar situations in the past where direct responses led to a rethink or reversal?
Please don’t feel in any pressure to respond-I understand this is a big ask. But even raising the question might spark further thought and discussion.
Thank you again for everything you’re doing, especially in such challenging times. Your presence here has made a real difference.
With respect and solidarity✊
1 -
Just had a look at the previous posts then a barney over grammar, in the grand scheme of things the subject of grammar is irrelevant.
It's perfectly reasonable to be insular when faced with personal struggles but understand that other people face varying degrees of personal struggles on this site and that tact goes a long way.
I don't know, I never had the energy to nit pick over grammar on the internet, it was 2007 when I first had internet where I lived, it was Post Office broadband (Remember that?), you go on youtube back then and I saw many arguments over grammar and I never understood if it was being nasty or just being overly analytical.
0 -
I agree too! @JasonRA
Just so you know, I think Scope admin and a few of our lovely members have already sorted it out
Best Wishes
1 -
Thank you so much for your incredibly kind and thoughtful message. It really means a lot. I’ve genuinely felt the strength and solidarity growing in this space too, and it’s been inspiring to see so many people raising their voices, sharing knowledge, and supporting each other. If I’ve been able to contribute in any small way, I’m truly grateful.
I completely agree with your take on the consultation process. Like you, I’ve found the structure of the MS Forms route concerning. The way the questions are framed doesn’t feel neutral or inclusive, and it raises serious concerns about how the feedback will be interpreted or potentially disregarded.
Your instinct to encourage people to respond directly via email is, in my view, a really sound one. Submitting detailed, individual responses, especially when people clearly outline the real-life impacts of these proposals, can add both legal and moral weight. It also helps establish a documented trail of opposition that is harder to dismiss or overlook.
To your question, yes, there have been past situations where well-organised direct responses, particularly when echoed by advocacy groups, campaigners, and individuals with lived experience, have influenced policy outcomes. It’s not always fast or straightforward, but sustained pressure, especially when it’s backed by clear, rights-based arguments, can lead to rethinks, revisions, or at the very least, increased scrutiny.
You’re absolutely right to raise concerns around the Equality Act 2010. If these proposals do create a discriminatory or exclusionary environment, then highlighting that clearly with specific examples could be very powerful. It’s also important to show how the process itself may not meet the standards of a fair or accessible consultation.
And please don’t doubt your own knowledge or perspective. Whether self-taught or formally trained, what you’re bringing to this conversation is rooted in lived experience, careful reading, and thoughtful reflection. That is incredibly valuable and often just as important, if not more so, than a purely academic or legal perspective.
So yes, your understanding absolutely holds weight, and I think it’s a conversation well worth continuing. The more people who feel empowered to speak up, the harder it becomes for decision-makers to ignore our collective voice.
Thank you again for raising this, and for your presence and contribution. It’s making a real difference to us all.
With respect and solidarity✊
1 -
In light of what people are going through in their personal lives and with all of this going on right now , is placing a comma so important ? Really ? I think we all have all much much more to worry about .
4 -
Your comment genuinely made me laugh, even though you were making a serious point. It reminded me so much of my late mum. When I was a child, I visited my grandfather and he sent me home with a message for my mother: Could she not forget to close the gate when she leaves next time. My mum’s response? “Really? Well, all I can say is, with everything going on in the world, he’s a very lucky man if that’s all he has to worry about!”
Sometimes it really is about picking our battles, isn’t it?
5 -
These are better done on gov.uk rather than a 3rd party site, once enough signatures on gov.uk there has to be a debate in parliament.
0 -
Thats exactly it. It is just showing the current descriptors that dont give you 4 points.
If anyone wants to understand more the changes I suggest reading the green paper itself, or the summary post I made some weeks ago. I think I seen another well written summary on here as well.
Stay away from rag articles and youtube channels.
I have stopped reading news on it entirely now, as there will be nothing new of substance until either the parliament debate happens, or legal action.
4 -
Hi @noonebelieves - I hope it's OK to respond in part to your recent comment. I've been trying to read the Labour Party's Green Paper for the 3rd time (I have had many interruptions due to dog-sitting & having a cat!), & I have to say how lengthy & unwieldy, not to say repetitive, I find it. I've just checked, & this is exactly twice the length of the Conservative's 2024 Green Paper.
I did respond to the above mentioned Conservative's Green Paper following one reading, it taking me about 2 hours to complete, as I wanted to give as much detail as possible where I could. I was pleased that there were so many responses (over 16,000).
With reading this Green Paper I have to say that there's been an inner resentment building up inside me; why should we respond when we're not being consulted upon over the issues that (I feel) will affect the majority of disabled people the most; why should we answer queries which make me feel that either:
a) Labour's 'fishing' to get responses as they don't know themselves,
b) they can then say we've had x responses, & this is what disabled people have told us they want, or
c) both a) & b) apply?
I've just seen MW's response after struggling to write this as my cat has been 'helping' by walking in front of my computer screen & on the keyboard. Whilst of the same opinion as you both that emailing is the better way forward, I will try to remain objective as I've found that the best way for me (well at least in confronting the medical establishment)!
0 -
Hi @MW123,
Your response has truly made my day-and I don’t say that lightly. It brought so much clarity, calm, motivation, and a renewed sense of direction at a time when many of us have been feeling unheard and overwhelmed . I honestly feel like this is the motivation I’ve been searching for to keep pushing forward with purpose. Not only that-when people see your message on this Green Paper thread in the morning, I’m sure it will spark a powerful positive reaction from our fellow scope members. This is the kind of motivation and impetus we’ve all been waiting for. It also gives people the empowering sense that they have directly taken a clear stand against these appalling benefit cuts, rather than leaving it to someone else and living in fear. This is amazing-truly amazing! 😀
Thank you for affirming not just the legal concerns, but also the value of lived experience, thoughtful reflection, and community-led resistance. You’ve helped validate what so many of us have felt: that this entire proposal and consultation is deeply flawed and insulting - while the MS Forms route feels more like a filter than an inclusive consultation forum.
Your encouragement to use the official email route and to speak clearly, honestly, individually and with strength has given us a grounded, tangible step forward.We can be heard. We must be heard.
It’s also incredibly reassuring to know that well-organised direct responses have, in the past, made a tangible difference-particularly when echoed by advocacy groups and individuals with lived experience, and grounded in Disability rights-based arguments. Your points around the Equality Act 2010 and the importance of highlighting both the discriminatory impacts (personal) and the flaws in the proposal/consultation process have given me/us a clearer path forward and renewed confidence thatour individual and collective voices truly do matter.We cannot be silenced! ✊
I hope everyone reading this feels empowered to do just that-and to share this message with their disabled friends, family, colleagues,neighbours, and appropriate local/social groups. This is how we build momentum to oppose this “SHAM” Non-inclusive discriminatory-Pathways to Work-Green Paper Proposal and the NO-Consultation process.person by person, voice by voice, truth by truth.
With deep gratitude, respect, and solidarity,✌️✊🤗2 -
Bless you @chiarieds – thank you so much for your thoughtful and insightful comment.
And I must say, your cat’s attempted sabotage of your keyboard gave me a proper laugh! 🤣Perhaps it wasn’t sabotage at all – maybe the little one just couldn’t stay quiet while watching their human being pushed around by a government that’s clearly lost the plot. If only the Labour Govt were half as honest as our pets…🤔
Jokes aside, what you’ve said really hits home. Like you, I tried to read through the 82-page paper(labour one) -it was exhausting, repetitive, vague and downright inaccessible(for me). I couldn’t finish it. It wasn’t just the fatigue; it was the overwhelming sense that this wasn’t meant for us. Not really. Unless someone is unbelievably eager to jump into a pipe dream of “unemployment insurance” with no actual substance, this paper offers nothing but confusion and distress.
Your a) and b) theories are not just possible – I’d say they’re highly likely. This feels exactly like a trap. As I’ve written before, I truly believe Labour has laid this consultation to “fish” for responses they can later twist into stats. Then they’ll stand up in Parliament and say:“Hey look, we consulted inclusively with disabled people.400,000 of them said they want to work!”…without ever showing how manipulated and leading the questions were, how skewed the whole process is, and how unrepresentative the answers might be.
You absolutely nailed it when you said:
“We’re not being consulted upon over the issues that (I feel) will affect the majority of disabled people the most”
That is the heart of this entire problem and I carry the same views.
And that’s exactly what makes the MS Forms link route so dangerous . There are 20 leading questions, framed in such a way that even people answering in good faith could end up feeding a narrative they fundamentally disagree with. It’s like being funnelled into a “yes”no matter what you actually say. There’s a lot more I’d like to say, but I’ll hold back-this is a civil forum, after all.
That’s why I won’t touch that form – not one click. It’s a shiny one-click trap, and I genuinely fear how this story ends if we let it play out on their terms
So what are we left with? Well, they’re hoping the answer is “nothing.” That we stay silent. That we’re too exhausted, or confused, or alone to fight back.
But we’re not.
Because we are brave. We are resilient. And our voices can carry so much power – if we use them strategically.
That’s why I believe the better response as discussed with @mw123 and now affirmed by your insight, Chiarieds – is to bypass the MS Form entirely and instead respond and oppose directly to the Green Paper proposal /consulation via email.There, we can speak freely and clearly-without being boxed in by their questions or sidelined and silenced by this SHAM of a consultation from the government.
We can say what actually matters. We can hold the line, not them!
I really have so much hope we can keep this energy going 😊Thank you again for everything you bring here -cat chaos included 😻
In Solidarity ✊0 -
Made me laugh about the members cat on the keypad, mine does the same ,but she touches the mouse pad with her paw while on my knee as the laptop is on a table , and it closes everything down , or she will sit by my side and touch my sleeve and get her claw stuck , she just loves me and needs to be near me . I'm honoured and I love her so she gets away with it .
0
Categories
- All Categories
- 14.8K Start here and say hello!
- 7K Coffee lounge
- 79 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 99 Announcements and information
- 23.1K Talk about life
- 5.4K Everyday life
- 248 Current affairs
- 2.3K Families and carers
- 853 Education and skills
- 1.8K Work
- 492 Money and bills
- 3.5K Housing and independent living
- 985 Transport and travel
- 681 Relationships
- 71 Sex and intimacy
- 1.4K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 855 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 914 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 37.8K Talk about your benefits
- 5.8K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.1K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 7.5K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.4K Benefits and income