Green Paper Discussion (from 24th March, 2025)

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.

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

@luvpink

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?

@Albus_Scope

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? 🤔

I hear you, @Martinp

I reckon they'll line me up as a lingerie model, miner or motor mechanic.

Obviously, I'll excel in any of those roles, post DWP cure. 😎

@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🤷🏻‍♂️

@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.

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.

Well, I think if you have mobility issues and already have scored 4 or more points in the descriptors in the past and awarded long term award then you should be fine theoretically that is. I say this because I think to start with they are going to go after people with mental health condition, those on LCWRA being the main focus. They have not released any further info on the WCA so there is no way to knowing what they are planning to change and what the descriptors will be.

I will say that I am only guessing at this because you can not trust this gov at all, they can go after everyone. We will not know until they release further info on the WCA descriptors etc. Whatever they decide, we will all have to unite and fight it.