Scope's reply to the governments planned concessions to the green paper.

1161719212240

Comments

  • Ross1975
    Ross1975 Community Member Posts: 1,158 Championing
    edited June 2025

    I'm unsure how things are going to work when PIP is what you have to claim for to get the UC health element when the WCA is scrapped. If PIP daily living is the gateway to the UC health element and you get enough points for this in daily living then I'm guessing you'll be left alone and get LCWRA money, but would you get PIP money as well?

    Will it be possible to only get LCWRA money, to only get PIP money, and to get both?

  • JasonRA
    JasonRA Community Member Posts: 301 Championing

    You can rest assured that they'll make it so damn difficult to by able to claim this "health element" from 2028 onwards, it will be absolute chaos.

  • mawempathy
    mawempathy Community Member Posts: 150 Empowering

    You need to get enough points for DLA in PIP to get the new UC health element. So you either get both payments, or neither. They are incentivising a lot more people to try and get PIP, but, of course, they are tightening the screws on eligibility to make it much more difficult.

  • mawempathy
    mawempathy Community Member Posts: 150 Empowering

    These reforms that are causing so much angst and distress will save less than the amount projected to be increased spending on asylum in the next 1-2 years.

  • Stellar
    Stellar Community Member Posts: 486 Pioneering

    because experts will call Starver et al. out on their fundamentally unwelcome ****. its the same reason Brexit happened.

  • Ross1975
    Ross1975 Community Member Posts: 1,158 Championing
    edited June 2025

    Ah okay, I'm on LCWRA but not PIP at the moment, so when everything's rolled into PIP and I get reassessed I'll either end up on no money at all or more than what I'm on now.

  • mawempathy
    mawempathy Community Member Posts: 150 Empowering
    edited June 2025


    Yes, but that's assuming they don't put additional protections in to avoid cliff edge situations like yours. These aspects of the bill are subject to the Timms review, as I understand it.

    Also… as an existing LCRWA claimant, I think you're protected in the immediate term.

  • Stellar
    Stellar Community Member Posts: 486 Pioneering

    Not quite. It's cause they know even if people know, they won't adequately oppose it. The UK left as a movement is politically and strategically inept. So it makes sense they won't care what the masses think.

    politics is about strategy, not just whether the facts are on your side. the facts are these cuts will lead to the completely avoidable deaths of thousands of disabled people. any strategy that isnt targeted, effective and relentless will fail.

  • JasonRA
    JasonRA Community Member Posts: 301 Championing
  • Girl_No1
    Girl_No1 Community Member Posts: 413 Trailblazing

    This, amongst other things, just proves they have no/zero/zilch/nada understanding of the processes they are intent on 'reforming'.

    Even those raising questions don't have a single clue about the nuances/intracacies of welfare benefits.

    Seems to me they have chosen to wilfully remain ignorant by failing to consult 'experts' (us), and instead just had a wee discussion at the pub on a Friday evening about it.

    The stench of desperation from Kendall confirms, for me at least, they are not being completely transparent about their intentions.

  • Stellar
    Stellar Community Member Posts: 486 Pioneering

    Funding alone isnt enough. NHS mental health services are institutionally abusive and actively cause harm to mad people. This is why many young people do not engage, whether by choice or otherwise.

    its not just poverty. they're more likely to die.

  • JasonRA
    JasonRA Community Member Posts: 301 Championing

    They seem willing to implode the Labour Party to get this rotten bill pushed through. It’s starting to look quite bizarre.

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Community Member Posts: 2,048 Championing

    So they’re going back on their concessions and admitting we will still fall under the 4 point rule . Meg hillier needs to accept she’s been hoodwinked into agreeing to a bill that has no concessions at all , just a delay to destitution

  • worried33
    worried33 Community Member Posts: 1,054 Championing

    Kendall has said three times now, she is trying to address the incapacity benefit high take up in previous manufacturing areas (indicating she thinks cases are not genuine), she also responded to an MP saying she doesnt believe luck is involved in becoming disabled, but actually they need to support these areas economically with high claimant rates, cant believe what I am watching.

  • worried33
    worried33 Community Member Posts: 1,054 Championing

    I think it wont matter, I expect the 2 point descriptors today to not exist on the new assessment.

  • YogiBear
    YogiBear Community Member Posts: 410 Pioneering

    It looks like everyone who is being reassessed from November 2026 will be assessed under the 4 point descriptor. So everyone will be treated the same new/existing claimants. I believe this Green Paper consultation has been a load of nonsense. The government have done this so it looks like they are doing the right thing by disabled people.

  • JasonRA
    JasonRA Community Member Posts: 301 Championing
    edited June 2025

    Kendall REALLY detests disabled people.

  • worried33
    worried33 Community Member Posts: 1,054 Championing
    edited June 2025

    I clearly heard her say existing claimants will be on the old system. However she specifically said 2026. So still unclear what happens post timms review.

  • MadMilan2019
    MadMilan2019 Community Member Posts: 190 Empowering

    We need to campaign write to MPs re 4 pint reassessment, and challenge it in the courts if at all possible.

    I am going to take advice from Leeds Welfare Rights, and CAB Mind Legal unit and 5 other pro bono legal firms.

  • MadMilan2019
    MadMilan2019 Community Member Posts: 190 Empowering

    Somebody asked why cant PM Chancellor plus DWP misters be taken to court for incitement to hatred based on protected characteristics of disability.

    Incitement to any form of hatred (anti LGBT, disability, race) has to use violent threatening language.

    So, we need to keep campaigning writing to media outlining our case, and write to MPs, mass lobbies of Parliament etc., all the way up to the next general election in an alliance of disabled peoples organisations, to reverse these changes, if they are passed this time, and WE CAN, there are 11 million pensioners often with severe complex disabilities and 16million disabled people - if we ally with pensioners groups we can win.

    And consult lawyers and barristers re course of legal redress of injustices/ grievances.

    We need to have the determination of Mandela, the patience of Gandhi and the compassion and wisdom of Buddha.

This discussion has been closed.