Disability Benefit Cuts - Take action before July 9th.

Same that bloke bellowing is giving me headache, that and I have no idea what’s going on lol

Most of them weren't in there when the impact statements were being read out.so them on 90 grand a year, don't care how the impact this will have on our lives. Laughing and joking shows the disregard they show for us shameful

Gone out to vote for a 3rd reading of the UC bill

For anyone who can't access the article:

Ministers have made another concession to their flagship welfare bill, over an amendment tabled by the Labour MP Marie Tidball in an attempt to enshrine safeguards for disabled people.

Tidball’s amendment called for a series of protections, including that future changes to the personal independence payment (Pip) be co-produced with disabled people and experts; that the government commit to a clear summer consultation before new eligibility rules for Pip are applied to new claimants; and that measurable targets be set to close the disability employment gap.

Ministers had already scrapped a proposal to tighten Pip rules for existing claimants, removing the clause entirely from the bill last week to avoid a major rebellion. It also delayed changes for new claimants until after a review led by Stephen Timms, the minister for social security and disability, concludes later this year.

Speaking at the end of a debate on the report stage of the bill, which was called the universal credit and personal independence payment bill, but has now been renamed the universal credit bill, Timms said the government would accept much of Tidball’s amendment, calling it a “helpful checklist” for changes.

This included, he said, Tidball’s suggestion in her amendment that his review work with a “disability co-production taskforce”, which would have a majority of representatives who either had a disability or were representatives from disabled people’s groups.

Any conclusions on the review would be based on “consensus”, he said, adding: “The outcome of the review will be central to the legislation that follows.”

However, Timms said he would not accept Tidball’s proposal for a 12-month timetable for the review, saying he did not want to “rush” a process scheduled to end in autumn 2026.

It marks the second time in just over a week that the government has been forced to make big revisions to its controversial legislation, after a week of chaos in the Commons that left Keir Starmer’s authority bruised, forcing him to abandon a central plank of the bill.

Alongside Tidball’s proposals, several backbench Labour MPs – including Rachael Maskell – have tabled their own amendments, with Maskell’s arguing that someone who has slipped out of and then back into the LCWRA eligibility criteria either side of April 2026 should still be able to claim the higher rate.

The UN organisation for disabled people’s rights on Tuesday asked the UK government for details about the impact of its welfare bill, expressing its concerns about potential adverse effects in a rare intervention.

The UN committee said it had received “credible information” that the welfare changes would “deepen the signs of regression”, and sought information on “any measures to address the foreseeable risk of increasing poverty rates amongst persons with disabilities if cuts are approved”.

Rachel maskell bill did it go through? My brain frazzled with all this

UC and PIP bill third reading

17.59 parliament tv  Stephen Timms, DWP disability minister on the severe conditions criteria

"The severe conditions criteria in the bill exactly reflects how the functional tests are applied at present.  That is in guidance. It’s being moved in this bill into legislation.  It does take account of Parkinson’s.  It does take account of MS.  Because people need to meet the descriptors reliably, safely, repeatedly and in a reasonable time frame.  And so I can give a very firm assurance to those who are concerned about how the severe conditions criteria will work for those on fluctuating conditions.

"The word constantly here refers, as I said in my intervention earlier, to the functional criteria needing to apply at all times, not to somebody’s symptoms."

Is it good or bad that it’s been voted to get a 3rd hearing