Green Paper Related Discussions

If they tried to push it through as a money bill it would certainly be the end for Starmer, I think it really would be a step too far for not just labour mp's but the house of commons. I also think the media like to inflame these issues and make things up, albeit maybe some minor truth in it like they had a discussion about it or something. Starmer already has loads of mp's rebelling against these cuts, he'd be a complete fool to try and do this, although I agree he's a complete ego maniac and doesn't care what anyone else thinks.

Under the Parliament Act 1911, a bill can be designated a Money Bill if it only contains provisions dealing with national taxation, public money, or loans. This designation:

• Must be made by the Speaker of the House of Commons, not the government.
• Cannot be challenged in court once made.
• Severely limits scrutiny: the House of Lords can debate it but not amend or block it, and it becomes law within a month of passing the Commons.

⚠️ Why This Is Controversial and Possibly Abusive

The article suggests the government might:

1. Draft the bill narrowly, focusing only on cuts (e.g. changes to PIP or eligibility rules).
2. Classify it as a Money Bill to bypass Lords scrutiny and rush it through.
3. Use a Committee of the Whole House to dodge detailed evidence hearings.

If true, this would be a deliberate effort to reduce parliamentary scrutiny and push through significant cuts to disability support with minimal opposition.

That would raise serious democratic and constitutional concerns, especially if:

• The cuts affect entitlement criteria (not just spending levels).
• The bill includes non-financial provisions, like assessment reforms or obligations on claimants.

Even if it technically qualifies, this approach would be seen as undermining transparency and accountability on a matter that deeply affects disabled people.

🧨 Political Fallout?

As the article notes:

• Labour MPs and ministers may revolt.
• At least one minister may resign.
• The strategy could inflame public and media backlash — especially from disability rights groups.

This could also unite cross-party opposition and possibly result in legal or procedural challenges in Parliament (though courts cannot overturn a Speaker's Money Bill ruling).

🔍 What to Watch

• When the bill is introduced (expected mid-June).
• Whether it is certified as a Money Bill by the Speaker.
• What the bill actually says — does it only adjust finances, or does it impose new rules and obligations?
• Backbench and ministerial response, especially from Labour or crossbench Lords.
• Statements by disability groups (like Disability Rights UK, Z2K, or the Disability Benefits Consortium).

From the Rightsnet site

This FOI response issued on 15 May 2025 includes the following -

‘… those above working age who score fewer than 4 points in all daily living activities … will not have their eligibility assessed on this requirement, although current working age claimants that are affected may continue to be affected after they reach state pension age.’

When asked to clarify if this means it has been decided that there will be a specific exclusion of pension age claimants from the 4 point rule, the DWP issued a further FOI response (dated 4 June 2025) confirming that is now withholding the information requested -

‘The Department can confirm that it holds information relevant to your request. However, this material is being withheld under Section 35(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, which exempts information relating to the formulation or development of government policy.

Your questions pertain to part of a live and evolving process of policy formulation, where officials and Ministers are considering a range of options, including those that may not ultimately be taken forward.’

https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/21219