Green Paper Related Discussions
Comments
-
I seen goverment warning mps if they don't vote for cuts they will lose thier seats ??? Can this be done
0 -
No not good enough that's worse we been waiting months he knows he will lose if putting back for impact reports ect like debbie Abrahams suggested fine not just put back for us to suffer more
0 -
This is not a win I feel this is worse seek help from where ??? Save up for a tent no needs to be because waiting for impact report like Debbie Abrahams said
0 -
I agree it's worse he needs to just do it but he knows won't go against this is 10 times worse so we just wait longer of more misery mental torture how long can we do this for
0 -
How just do on 30th of June or whenever leave it months for it to die down and mps won't be as angry and he's done this deliberately I can't take more months of this noting he does is for good still no impact assessment noting for us to get used too
0 -
yh that's why he's doing this let it go ahead !! In few months time it will be forgotten he's smart he knows he won't calm waters by June so give it few months noting changes we are more ill
0 -
He knew he would lose I'm done with it all
0 -
No hope is there they knew they would lose and wouldn't go through rather get it over amd done with now
0 -
Yh that's why labour extend it they knew oh god I just emailed debbie Abrahams we have to email our mps again saying we see through this
0 -
That's why starmer putting on hold to calm them and then forget about it
0 -
If it goes ahead in jube we have a chance if he leaves for months anger dies down we are forgotten also winter fuel and child cap takes up all the money I besides myself this is to much
0 -
People over 40 with back problems basically anyone over 40 when we get confirmation that thier extendijg the time scale we have to email again stating this is just a smoke screen we want impact assessment everything not just put on hold to face the same outcome if went ahead in june we would have a good chamce and they know it this is destroying us I've already emailed debbie Abrahams s
1 -
That's right, they've always got plenty of money for their own priorities. 😤
I've just read that with the upcoming Spending Review that they have suddenly announced that they are going to spend 93 billion on capital spending!! 😱
Capital spending is things like on new schools, hospitals, prisons, the rail system and even nuclear reactors. So it is needed but they are being so mean with money for government departments like the DWP, you'd think the country was bankrupt!
They can easily afford to do everything properly, this country isn't at all short of money.
Capital spending projects attract private investment where government departments are part of the public sector. Everything has to go into private hands, all the time, according to them.
Some "Labour" government!! They deserve to lose all their voters with their appalling attitude, I hope that they never get back into power. 😡
3 -
Would they delay it when the OBR will release an impact statement letting MPs know exactly how many people will be affected? I’m sure I read the impact statement will be released after the vote , obvious reasons why
0 -
I have again been reading up on Liz Kendalls careless and incorrect comments that PIP was never designed for those with mental health issues. She's obviously not done her homework (yet again) as it's simply not true. This is what I found out again that completely contradicts her harmful and very untruthful comments.
Would It Be Lawful?
The UK government can lawfully change the eligibility criteria or descriptors for PIP through secondary legislation (statutory instruments) without requiring a full Act of Parliament. This has happened before. However:
- The changes must not breach human rights law, equality law, or disability discrimination law.
- They must comply with Article 14 (non-discrimination) and Article 8 (right to private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which the UK is still bound by via the Human Rights Act 1998.
- The Equality Act 2010 prohibits indirect discrimination against disabled people, including those with mental health conditions.
So: yes, the DWP can propose changes—but the legality depends on how those changes are framed and whether they disproportionately disadvantage people with mental health disabilities.
⚖️ Could a Legal Challenge Be Brought?
Yes. There are several legal avenues for challenging such a policy:
1. Judicial Review
- Affected individuals or organisations (like disability rights charities) could apply for a judicial review of the regulations.
- The court could find the changes unlawful if they are:
- Irrational or unreasonable
- Discriminatory under the Equality Act
- Contrary to legitimate expectations (e.g., if the government previously committed to parity between physical and mental health)
- In breach of procedural fairness or inadequate consultation
2. Discrimination Claims
- If the criteria systematically disadvantage claimants with mental health issues, they could be found to amount to indirect disability discrimination under the Equality Act 2010.
- The burden would be on the government to show that the changes are a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
3. Human Rights Challenges
- Discrimination against those with mental health conditions in access to financial support may also violate Article 14 of the ECHR, especially when linked to Article 1 of Protocol 1 (the right to property, including welfare benefits).
4. UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD)
- While not directly enforceable in UK courts, failure to uphold the rights of people with psychosocial disabilities could be used in legal arguments or international pressure (e.g., complaints to the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities).
🧠 Background: PIP Was Meant to Cover Mental Health
PIP explicitly includes mental health in its legislation:
- The 2013 PIP assessment guide and regulations make clear that psychological distress, cognitive difficulties, and fluctuating mental health conditions are covered.
- Court cases (e.g., MH v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions) have repeatedly affirmed that mental health issues must be given equal weight in PIP assessments.
Therefore, attempting to reframe PIP as being "for physical conditions only" could face strong legal opposition.
🧱 Examples of Successful Legal Challenges:
- RF v Secretary of State (2017): A successful challenge to PIP rules that unfairly excluded people who experienced overwhelming psychological distress from the mobility component. The DWP lost and had to change the law and reassess thousands of claims.
- Mathieson v Secretary of State (2015): The Supreme Court ruled that denying Disability Living Allowance to a disabled child in hospital was discriminatory.
🛡️ Summary
Question
Answer
Can the government change PIP rules?
Yes, via legislation—but changes must comply with equality and human rights law.
Would targeting mental health claimants be lawful?
Potentially unlawful if changes disproportionately harm people with mental health disabilities.
Could it be challenged?
Yes—via judicial review, discrimination claims, and human rights law.
Is there precedent for successful challenges?
Yes—several court cases have overturned discriminatory PIP policies.
I hope this puts some peoples minds at rest just a little, whenever Liz Kendall opens her gob and spouts lies I'll reasearch it and show her for the dangerous, evil narcissist that she is.
3 -
This is such a paltry amount of savings compared to what they throw around it makes me question if it’s even about money. I saw a headline about scrapping ECHP ( not sure if that’s the correct term) so will they start discriminating against disabled children as well as disabled adults? I didn’t read it so I don’t know details but nothing would surprise me . What’s annoying me is we are supposed to accept the benefits bill is too high and needs to come down hence stopping the only income for us yet the same amount they hope to save is already promised elsewhere. I read starmer is being advised to tax gambling sites to fund the new u turns , well why not do that to stop the cuts to pip ?
2 -
If delayed though won’t the impact statement be out for them to see then as we know the impact statement will show what we all know and the uproar will be more ?
1 -
Morning Charlie , I read that it’s not true they’re targeting MH and neurodivergent and that it’s a smokescreen for cutting benefits to older people with physical conditions.
1 -
Morning Johnny ,
I wrote exactly this . That’s why they’re rushing it through. The fact there’s now talk of a delay / concession makes me think they’re panicking and trying to find a way to get this to pass . Please god they start to u turn in some way 🤞🙏
1 -
I think that we are all going to have to get used to despairing at bad news and feeling better when we get good news. I think that we have to be prepared for that. 😊
At least we will know more of what's going to happen soon but although, I think that these proposals will be watered down a lot eventually, the Labour leadership will use anything that goes our way as an opportunity to try to find something to demolise us with.
Manipulative monsters like them will do that as a matter of course so we must be ready for it.
We must also be prepared for the long haul as they will fight our objections and those of our supporters, tooth and nail. They will put every obstacle they can in our way and delay any advantages we may be able to get, however insignificant, for as long as possible.
They will do everything possible to make us give up the fight. However discouraged we get, we must not, under any circumstances stop resisting them!!
That is so important, if we give up, they have won!!
Even if the vote goes for the proposals we have so much hope left. 😊
There will be an opportunity then to finally start legal challenges. As the government leadership seem to have gone against so many human rights and equality laws we have such a good chance there.
We have a lot of support from our DPOs, charities Labour MPs (whose jobs are on the line as we can easily vote them out) and our carers, family and friends.
In October, the OBR impact assessment of the cuts will come out, which will be as damning of the governments approach as they were when the Tories tried to get their own "reforms" through.
Plus we will have an opportunity to vote some Labour MPs out in the Local Elections next year, six months before the 4 point PIP ruling comes in.
If the vote goes in favour of the proposals, it is not the end!! ✊ Far from it.
1
Categories
- All Categories
- 15K Start here and say hello!
- 7.1K Coffee lounge
- 83 Games den
- 1.7K People power
- 111 Announcements and information
- 23.8K Talk about life
- 5.6K Everyday life
- 338 Current affairs
- 2.4K Families and carers
- 860 Education and skills
- 1.9K Work
- 510 Money and bills
- 3.6K Housing and independent living
- 1K Transport and travel
- 874 Relationships
- 254 Sex and intimacy
- 1.5K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.4K Talk about your impairment
- 859 Rare, invisible, and undiagnosed conditions
- 918 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.1K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.2K Autism and neurodiversity
- 38.7K Talk about your benefits
- 5.9K Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
- 19.4K PIP, DLA, ADP and AA
- 7.9K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.5K Benefits and income