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

1293032343540

Comments

  • sarah_lea12
    sarah_lea12 Community Member Posts: 442 Empowering

    well if they just accepted the u turn that new claimants only would be affected then we wouldn't be back to square 1. Benefits rules change and I wasn't able to claim old style esa but had to claim UC and the health element , but now the bill has been passed and we are tortured again with the anxiety of not knowing , maybe to try and kill a few more of us off .

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

    I think they still have a blank cheque to do what they want after Timms review on assessments, activities and descriptors. But the bill isn’t final yet. MP’s are seemingly demanding more detail on the review before next weeks third reading and vote.

    Still hope the speaker won’t let this sail through as a money bill next week, too. If he doesn’t designate it a money bill, the Lords can put a ton of scrutiny on every line in the bill if they want, and effectively force amendments.

    So July 9th next week is when the third reading happens, short debate and then vote.

  • sarah_lea12
    sarah_lea12 Community Member Posts: 442 Empowering

    we were okay until the MP's wanted more so now we are punished , they passed it and its what they wanted . Simms will review it and then we will all need to get four points , just as they wanted .

  • Tumilty
    Tumilty Community Member Posts: 505 Empowering

    Yes seemed to go ok, nice assessor, made me at ease, couldn't understand a few questions even though simple questions.

  • geckobat
    geckobat Community Member Posts: 204 Empowering
    edited July 2025

    Sorry, but I don't think we were okay at all. Nothing was secure or clear, it was a mess and still is. None of it is reform, it's just cuts and spite. I think they were always going to punish us.

  • mawempathy
    mawempathy Community Member Posts: 150 Empowering

    MP’s are demanding more clarity on the review before next week’s third reading and vote (July 9th). I’m hopeful they will force the government to limit the scope with another concession.
    4 points is just a technicality anyway. They could always make it twice as hard to get 2 points in the descriptors, and thus in real terms it’s 4 points for everyone.

  • secretsquirrel1
    secretsquirrel1 Community Member Posts: 2,048 Championing

    Did anyone here listen to their ramblings ? Was ME mentioned regarding the Timms report ?

  • tcellmutation
    tcellmutation Community Member Posts: 341 Empowering

    I don't think anyone knows what has passed and what has not...

  • Tumilty
    Tumilty Community Member Posts: 505 Empowering

    Thanks I'll try to remember that when happens. I know my rent price but didn't keep my service charge letter..I'll login to my northern counties account but they often good wi that stuff.

  • Andi66
    Andi66 Community Member Posts: 1,433 Championing

    So what does this mean for us who are already on pip. And for us who yet to be moved to UC .Also when we get reassessed do we have to abide by the 4 point rule

  • geckobat
    geckobat Community Member Posts: 204 Empowering
    edited July 2025

    I think regardless of how any of this turns out, we can only be sure of one thing, that they're going to make it a lot harder for all of us, current or future.

  • hallac
    hallac Community Member Posts: 32 Contributor

    I don’t want to sound doom and gloom but who would you vote in the next general election? Reform? Conservatives? Really are the two who would stand any chance and both would be worse than labour unfortunately.

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 1,169 Championing
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • sarah_lea12
    sarah_lea12 Community Member Posts: 442 Empowering

    The four points have been removed from the bill , so I understand , Timms will review it in November 2026, that is what I understand .

  • Andi66
    Andi66 Community Member Posts: 1,433 Championing

    This Timms bill they were referring to what is it?

    Also what about UC

  • AppleJacks
    AppleJacks Posts: 89 Empowering

    Labour's Mary Kelly Foy told MPs: "I popped out for a banana earlier on and, when I came back in, things had changed again. So I'm even more unclear on what I'm voting on."

    After the vote had taken place, Labour's Ian Lavery told the BBC: "This is an absolute shambles. I've never seen anything like it."

    Both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives criticised the process and said the bill should be pulled entirely.

    The government initially announced its plans for a shake-up of the benefits system in March, including measures to limit eligibility for Pip, the main disability benefit in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and freeze the health-related element of universal credit.

  • AppleJacks
    AppleJacks Posts: 89 Empowering

    There was particular confusion about what Sir Stephen's promise to remove tighter Pips tests from bill would mean in practice – and whether MPs would get a say over it.

    Speaking afterwards, one of the rebels, Paula Barker, said: "I am not sure that all colleagues understood what they voted for."

    She said she hoped this "unedifying spectacle" would trigger a "reset" in the government's relations with its own MPs, adding: "Perhaps they will question why so many of us are doubting what they are saying."

    "We all want the Labour government to succeed," she added.

    Another rebel, Richard Burgon said: "If the government doesn't deliver on its promises on personal independence payments, if they don't take out cuts to universal credit there is a possibility that this bill could still be defeated.

    "It is only a week to go but a week's a long time in politics."

    Following the vote, the MS Society said: "We thought last week's so-called concessions were last minute. But these panicked 11th hour changes still don't fix a rushed, poorly thought-out bill."

  • [Deleted User]
    [Deleted User] Posts: 1,169 Championing
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • chiarieds
    chiarieds Community Member Posts: 17,404 Championing

    Hi @secretsquirrel1 - yes, I watched part of it. One of the MPs said one of his constituents had ME, but he didn't mention anything about 'serious conditions,' he was just giving an example as to one of his constituents.

    With 'serious conditions' the Gov't propose using those defined in the WCA handbook for assessors. This is not condition specific, altho examples are given as to who might qualify or not.

    You can see the severe conditions criteria here if you scroll right down to Appendix 8 on p218: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/work-capability-assessment-handbook-for-healthcare-professionals

    You'll need to download the file first to access it.

    I'll try to show it. You must satisfy one of the LCWRA descriptors, and

    1. all four of the following criteria must also be met:

    Criterion

    Description

    Examples of conditions that might meet the criteria

    Examples of conditions that might not meet the criteria

    The level of function would always meet LCWRA.

    The level of function would always meet LCWRA criteria

    Motor Neurone Disease (MND), severe and progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis, Parkinson’s All dementias, All chromosomal conditions, Huntington’s severe irreversible cardiorespiratory failure, severe acquired brain injury … this list is not exhaustive.

    Conditions which might be severe at times, but recovery offunction might be present for substantial periods, such as recently diagnosed relapsing non-progressive forms of Multiple Sclerosis or some people with less severe mental health conditions with periods of reasonable function.

    Lifelong condition, once diagnosed

    The condition will always be present.

    Some lifelong conditions are present from birth, but others willdevelop or be acquired later in life.


    Conditions which might be cured by transplant/ surgery/treatments or conditions which might resolve. This should be based on currently available treatment on the NHS and not on the prospect of scientists discovering a cure in the future.

    No realistic prospect of recovery of function

    Advice on this should be based on currently available treatment and not on the prospect of scientists discovering a cure in the future.

    As per criterion 1.

    A person within the first 12 months following a significant stroke who may recover function during rehabilitation, so whilst the condition is lifelong, function might improve.

    Unambiguous condition

    They have been through relevant clinical investigation and a recognised medical diagnosis has been made.


    Non-specific symptoms not formally diagnosed or still undergoing investigation.

This discussion has been closed.