The Universal Credit Bill becomes law. Here are the changes to disability benefits you need to know
Comments
-
No, the FOI does not reflect PLANS from the time the response was given, it's DATA on who of the Health Element failed to qualify for DL PIP at their last attempt. So I have no idea why you keep saying it's not a guide to how eligibility will be decided, that's not the purpose of the FOI request!
People were doing the same thing (seeking FOI data) in response to the Green Paper proposals on the 4 point PIP rule and the data obtained from those are a major reason why PIP was dropped from the UC & PIP bill. That proactive set of actions to get FOIs were not based on knowing precise details either because the PIP review was always intended to go ahead anyway (as stated in the Green Paper) but only after the 4 point rule was included in legislation. Dropping that rule from the bill just flipped things around so that the review will now happen first.
So the idea that the FOI showing how many Health Element claimants failed to qualify for DL PIP doesn't have any applicability in this fight is pure nonsense.
The Green Paper specifically states that the scrapping of the WCA and using DL PIP as the gateway to the Health Element is not being consulted on and WILL be introduced via Primary Legislation. See paragraph 37 of the Green Paper specifically and I've attached the paragraph to this post too. So your belief that somehow this would be a surprise addition to what's coming up is baffling and totally misguided. Just because it wasn't included in the consultation doesn't eliminate it from existence. It's going to happen if it's not effectively opposed.
You can engage in this fight in whatever manner you see fit but don't encourage others to follow your lead based on misinformation.
Lives are at stake here.
2 -
I think that's why I still haven't got uc migrstion I have pip till 2030 with 4 points daily living ?? Tbh I feel the presence of The who convention so disturbing they definitely broke into uk politics same in Australia Canada especially we have many fights on our hands so what's the suggestions what to write
0 -
Thanks Catherine.
My main concern is the lack of protest and lead from disability orgs.
I've written a blog on the 5 remaining Green Paper proposals most likely to be in the autumn White Paper and what the implications are of each (see below link).
Very important point is that the WCA scrappage and introduction of DL PIP as the gateway to the Health Element will be going ahead if not effectively opposed so that is something that we can be 100% sure of.
So, if you feel able, share the blog below and try to rally support for opposing the autumn White Paper on any platform you're already engaging on. Even contact your MP if you feel safe and able to do so. But be very mindful of your own health and welfare, my main concern, as I've said, is the radio silence from disability orgs.
X
https://lurgeelife.wordpress.com/2025/08/17/the-5-remaining-pathways-to-work-proposals-the-2025-autumn-white-paper-whats-the-likely-impact/2 -
And just to add I back up everything in my blog with sources and provide links to those sources. I don't expect people to just take my word for it, I've done extensive research, data interrogation and analysis.
Have a read of it and share if you feel comfortable to.2 -
My worry is starner has got full control of mps we see how our freedom speech being eroded I believe mps will be frightened I hope I'm wrong labour have pulled a blinder with the gap between pip and wca I hope people haven't given up because this will be harder as starmer has more confidence just my thoughts
2 -
You have absolutely tapped into why I'm pushing so hard now to protest against the White Paper. The 4 point PIP rule was dropped *despite* the number of loyal MPs to Starmer only because of all vehement protest and lobbying from the disabled community.
The 'Health Element' were the sacrificial lambs in the UC Bill. The 48% cut for new claims after April 2026 went through because focus was mainly on PIP and MPs felt safe to support the cut because not enough protest and lobbying had been done to reinforce to them that this was a terrible idea.
We're in danger of letting this happen again by delaying any sort of protest or pressure on MPs. They need to know well in advance how many people are against these plans otherwise the same result will happen. A bill will be passed which will destroy thousands of chronically ill and disabled people's lives. I'm not standing by and I haven't done since the Green Paper was published. I'm disillusioned with the lack of unity and advocacy in the community for the Health Element.2 -
I'm going to start contacting mps yes the rush to get us all onto uc god I wish I could hold down a job this is torture
2 -
I'm afraid lawsa are being changed behind our backs everyday I won't day what but there is a few and as you rightly say notalk from disabled organisations
3 -
Thanks for sharing the screenshot of paragraph 37. I’ve read it carefully and it confirms exactly what I said: the proposal to use PIP as the gateway to the Health Element will be introduced via primary legislation and was not part of the consultation. That distinction matters. Signalling a change is not the same as consulting on it, and excluding it from consultation raises serious questions about transparency.
The FOI data clearly shows who stands to lose out if PIP becomes the gateway, and that makes it a valuable snapshot of current risk. But it does not confirm how eligibility will be redefined. That’s not a flaw in the data, it’s a flaw in how the Government is managing the process.
At no point have I discouraged others from acting. In my post on 16.08.25, I explicitly said people should challenge the White Paper if they can, because it puts disabled people and those with health conditions at risk. From my own personal viewpoint, writing to MPs based on speculation risks diluting the impact of future correspondence grounded in actual proposals. It’s the difference between raising a hypothetical concern and confronting a published policy. One invites dismissal, the other demands accountability.
And to be clear, many of us have already acted. Scope publicly challenged the proposals when the Green Paper was published, calling out the scale of the cuts and the threat to disabled people’s independence. Many of our members contacted their MPs and ministers directly. I personally had several meetings with my own MP to raise concerns. We did not sit passively by.
Others may choose to challenge now and I fully respect that. I simply intend to raise it again once the White Paper is published because I want to respond to the substance, not assumptions about what may be in it. I expect many charitable organisations will respond once the full detail of the White Paper is published, especially where any proposals may warrant legal challenge.
1 -
You have been fighting the case we all have let's unite to fight this together everyone has something to bring to the table we need to stand together share ideas knowledge support we have to focus on the next stage it won't be easy far from it but we must not give in
2 -
Let's not start with rumours please @Catherine21 it's best to stick to facts as we don't want people getting more worried than they have to be. 😉
1 -
Yeah it's not speculation though is it. It's as speculative as the 4 point PIP rule, but you do you.
There's lots of shifting of goalposts going on here and revision of points without acknowledging the revision so genuine engagement doesn't seem to be the aim on here so I'm out of this thread.
I'm over on X with the same handle if anyone else is interested in genuine & realistic engagement on this topic.1 -
Just to clarify for anyone following the thread. I have been consistent throughout. The FOI data is useful, but it reflects the system as it stood. DL PIP as a gateway was not part of the Green Paper consultation, and that distinction matters.
In my view, the White Paper will show what has been carried forward, what has been dropped, and who is affected. That is when scrutiny becomes meaningful, when we can respond to the actual proposals, not projections. Again, this is my personal viewpoint.
Others may take a different approach, and I fully respect that. But for me, speculation does not substitute for accountability. I prefer to engage once the policy is published, using facts, timing and precision. That is the kind of scrutiny I believe holds weight.Each member will have their own way of approaching this, and rightly so. What matters is that people act in ways that feel most effective and sustainable for them, whatever form that takes.
1 -
It's this misuse of the word speculation that I have a problem with. You're undermining opposition to the White Paper now with the misuse of that word.
Speculation is defined as: taking to be true on the basis of insufficient evidence
There is sufficient evidence that DL PIP will be used as the gateway for the 'Health Element' as per the paragraph in the Green Paper I provided above. There is also sufficient evidence that this will result in at least 23% of 'Health Element' claimants becoming ineligile.
I'm adding this final statement because you're continuing to mislead people by using the word "speculate" incorrectly which has the effect of undermining efforts to oppose the White Paper now.
You communicate with such authority on here yet hadn't even read paragraph *37* of the Green Paper. That tells me everything I need to know about your ability to accurately gauge the situation for the 'Health Element'.1 -
Important additional point:
The PIP 4 point rule was going to be introduced prior to the planned PIP review so if you vocalised your protest of that rule then you were doing so based on "speculation" (applying your use of this word).
The PIP review, which was due to be undertaken AFTER the planned 4 point rule implementation (before it was dropped from the bill), may have changed eligibility criteria so if you protested against that policy then you are now a hypocrite for saying we should wait to know eligibility details for the 'Health Element'. It's exactly the same situation.
The Timms PIP review is due to conclude in August 2026 so we can only base failure rate figures on current criteria in exactly the same way people protesting the 4 point PIP rule did.
The Timms PIP review may result in eligibility changing but, by your method, that means we can't even protest the White Paper because that isn't going to tell us what the DL PIP eligibility criteria will be following the PIP review.1 -
I have been consistent throughout. The FOI is useful, but it reflects the system as it stood. DL PIP as gateway was not part of the Green Paper consultation. Paragraph 37 refers to aligning support with daily living needs, but it does not propose scrapping the Work Capability Assessment or formalising PIP as the sole gateway.
That shift has been signalled, yes, but it has not been legislated or consulted on directly. That distinction matters, especially when safeguarding is at stake. I have never denied the Government’s direction of travel. I have said the legislative framing has not yet been published. That is not evasion. It is precision.
Urgency is not the issue for me. Others may feel differently, but I am holding mine for when the Government puts its intentions into writing. The White Paper will show who is affected, how exclusions are defined, and what was carried forward from consultation. That is when scrutiny becomes meaningful and when accountability begins.
0 -
The 4-point PIP rule was included in draft legislation. That made it a formal proposal, not speculation. Protesting a published clause in a bill is not the same as responding to a signal without legislative framing. That distinction matters. I’ve never said we shouldn’t challenge the White Paper. I’ve said I prefer to respond to published proposals, not assumptions. That’s not hypocrisy, it’s consistency.
I raised concerns about the Green Paper, met with my MP, and supported Scope’s public challenge. I’ve acted, and I will continue to do so. The Timms PIP review may well change eligibility criteria, but until that happens, the current descriptors remain the basis for scrutiny.
That’s why the FOI data is relevant, but it doesn’t define future eligibility, and it doesn’t confirm how DL PIP will be used as a gateway. That’s why I’ve said the White Paper matters. It will show what’s being carried forward, what’s being formalised, and who is affected.
0 -
Paragraph 37 *literally* states that the Work Capability Assessment will be scrapped in the first line of that paragraph and that access to UC Health will be via qualification of DL PIP. It *literally* states that this will be implemented via Primary Legislation.
Your revisionism of the facts is so easily disproven! Good grief. You really are so intent on believing your own fantasy version.
1 -
0
-
I said that if you protested the 4 point PIP rule based on the Green Paper before the UC & PIP Bill was published (so between March and June) that would make you a hypocrite.
You've said you did raise concerns about the Green Paper with your MP so you did vocalise your opposition based on what you would call "speculation" (the Green Paper).
You've then contradicted yourself again by saying "the current descriptors remain the basis for scrutiny" but then in previous posts you've said that the FOI isn't useful for protesting because it's a snapshot of the eligibility criteria now.
Your apparent need to be right is blinding you to the actual evidence and reality of the situation and causing you to make multiple contradictions and illogical statements.1
Categories
- All Categories
- 15.9K Start here and say hello!
- 7.6K Coffee lounge
- 108 Games den
- 1.8K People power
- 164 Announcements and information
- 25.4K Talk about life
- 6.2K Everyday life
- 506 Current affairs
- 2.5K Families and carers
- 874 Education and skills
- 2K Work
- 588 Money and bills
- 3.7K Housing and independent living
- 1.2K Transport and travel
- 646 Relationships
- 1.6K Mental health and wellbeing
- 2.5K Talk about your impairment
- 883 Rare, invisible, & undiagnosed conditions
- 942 Neurological impairments and pain
- 2.2K Cerebral Palsy Network
- 1.3K Autism and neurodiversity
- 41K Talk about your benefits
- 6.1K Employment & Support Allowance (ESA)
- 20.3K PIP, DLA, ADP & AA
- 9.2K Universal Credit (UC)
- 5.3K Benefits and income