Universal Credit Act 2025 - Latest Updates (05.03.26)

1356

Comments

  • Emilee
    Emilee Online Community Member Posts: 396 Pioneering

    @Catherine21

    They are focussing on groups whose conditions are most likely to have changed. For example, people with a short-term prognosis, such as those claiming for pregnancy complications or those who have recovered following cancer treatment. It also includes individuals whose initial awards were short and who were given a 1–2 year review date.

  • Emilee
    Emilee Online Community Member Posts: 396 Pioneering

    I agree, or rather having a separate discussion for chatter about it, fears and worries, and then this left open for genuine questions that may easily get missed otherwise.

  • Santosha12
    Santosha12 Online Community Member Posts: 3,779 Championing

    I don't think anything should be 'locked', or that there should be a separate discussion for chat or fears (if it's on this topic) - it seems to me it would then lose momentum and members would not then be able to express concerns, or fears, about specific points.

    I find it very easy to scroll through to find any 'official' commentary but I read all the 'chat/concerns' anyway and personally, find them valid and illuminating.

  • Santosha12
    Santosha12 Online Community Member Posts: 3,779 Championing

    Just to add, the first two posts are 'the facts' (on page 1) provided by Scope 'community' and Mary. Everything else seems to me to be chat/discussion - I don't see why there'd be any need to 'censure'/disallow that. Imo, none of the 'facts' get lost in the chat as they're clear for anyone to read, as they see fit.

  • Emilee
    Emilee Online Community Member Posts: 396 Pioneering

    I do understand that @Santosha12, and I truly would not want to see anyone censured or disallowed.

    I suppose my concern is that people scrolling through because they want answers will find their fears heightened or reinforced by some of the responses, especially as some contain inaccuracies or fears shared as fact.

  • Santosha12
    Santosha12 Online Community Member Posts: 3,779 Championing

    I get that, I guess my point is that Scope have created the thread and the facts are very clear in the first two posts.

    Any further debate/drilling in to what that means for individuals' circumstances is what all the chat is about, including opinions.

    If it's split to a separate thread I can't see how anyone would bother replying as they'd have to remember what they've seen on the original thread to continue the debate elsewhere (I might be misunderstanding what the suggestion is 🫠😊). Others' fears will still present themselves from seeing the same contributions elsewhere. To me, it just has the potential to close the discussion.

    Any inaccuracies here can be corrected by those 'in the know'.

    It's a minefield I think - a complex topic which has been set out well and clearly by scope. The ongoing exchange is, to my mind, just members navigating that and posing the questions and thoughts that are genuine to them and their circumstances.

  • Santosha12
    Santosha12 Online Community Member Posts: 3,779 Championing

    "Any inaccuracies here can be corrected by those in the know".......... @Emilee it's probably incorrect of me to say that with certainty as, for example, the 'Severe Conditions Criteria', issued to the healthcare professionals, won't be issued publicly until the autumn. I think it's that lack of information and ambiguity that creates uncertainty, worry and fear and not something that Scope will be able to provide clarity on. I personally will continue to avoid You Tube !!

  • Catherine21
    Catherine21 Online Community Member Posts: 9,632 Championing
  • Emilee
    Emilee Online Community Member Posts: 396 Pioneering

    That is fair, I understand your points and why this way works well for people too

  • Santosha12
    Santosha12 Online Community Member Posts: 3,779 Championing

    I should acknowledge there was a thread last year that got split, for discussion I think, but I can't remember what that was about, possibly Welfare Changes, I don't know tbh how that worked.

    When I'm on a thread I often have to go back to page 1 to double check what the thread is 🙄😅 but that's just me, and I can go off topic if I'm not careful which can be frustrating.

  • Catherine21
    Catherine21 Online Community Member Posts: 9,632 Championing

    Me too my mind goes onto ten other subjects at same time then i feel rude if i dont ask how the person is and then i message as if im talking of its aboit uc i can end up talking about weather what ive bought how my day is the works then i relize ive gone off topic hard for some people to stay focused

  • Catherine21
    Catherine21 Online Community Member Posts: 9,632 Championing

    Hi madmilan thankyou for all your work i agree with you im hoping with the rise of the Green party that in may they get more seats and labour get less it seems the worlds going back in time all people fought for over the years is slowly been taken brick by brick its more out of the peoples hands but we have to remember we are powerful togeather we wasnt meant to live so oppressed kept down disrespected disregarded and i agree not many charties even unions stepping up

  • Jamk85
    Jamk85 Online Community Member Posts: 56 Empowering

    Hi,

    upon reading it says they want to target these groups, in this paragraph

    In the Pathways to Work Green Paper last year, we said that we would turn on scheduled WCA reassessments as we build up capacity in our assessment providers. We are prioritising scheduled reassessments for people who are most likely to have had a change in their circumstances—for example, those with a short-term prognosis, for whom we can reasonably anticipate that a

    change in their health condition has occurred. That includes those with risks from pregnancy complications, or those who have recovered following cancer treatment.

    https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2026-03-04/debates/1532738B-A3C2-4ACB-AE5B-0D7B8FAC2600/WorkCapabilityAssessmentTimescales
  • Hopeless
    Hopeless Online Community Member, Scope Member Posts: 1,005 Pioneering
  • MadMilan2019
    MadMilan2019 Online Community Member Posts: 192 Empowering

    OIP.93cMywEBk5xcbhsiwC8qogHaDt?w=312&h=200&c=10&o=6&pid=genserp&rm=2

    There is a valid legal challengeThere is a valid legal challenge to the UK's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) Bill due to concerns over its potential impact on human rights and the Equality Amendment Act 2010. Legal experts have warned that the proposed changes to PIP could face significant legal challenges, particularly regarding the Equality Act 2010, which prohibits discrimination against disabled people. The Equality Act 2010 could come into play here, and there are concerns that the new criteria may disproportionately affect those with particular disabilities, especially mental health conditions. Legal action might be possible if the Government's criteria unfairly impact disabled people or fail to provide reasonable accommodations for specific needs. The assessment process could be scrutinized to ensure it is lawful, rational, and proportionate. Express+2

    Therefore we need to organise and work with this legal challenge, with Minds Legal Unit, pro bono lawyers, Public Health Lawyers Age UKs to reverse these £2.5bnn cuts in the UC AND PIP Bill cuts.

    I am not giving up, protesting, peacefully not fighting back, I am a true Buddhist; anger never persuades, law, facts and evidence in the courts does.

    I am copying this to Minds Legal Unit, for advice, and all pro bono law charities, and group. Pro Bono means in Latin: ''for good cause'; do you all agree that we human beings have dignity a right to adequate benefits, to equality, to self esteem/ duty of care, right to life, to be inspired, and to overthrow disabalist oppression? We can reverse these cuts, our livers literally depend on it, here were still ongoing sucides during the run up to the UC PIP BILL in July 2025. Some indeed expressed extreme distress: suicidal feelings, including me, but I chose to be a politico-spiritual warrior for disabled people, for compassion for adequate benefits and other rights for us all. If I had suicided it would mean disabalism, and a Labour (sic) govt had won.

    ODF.RgzPOpb6Ek34yBm_Ez2vJw?w=16&h=16&c=10&o=6&pid=genserp&rm=2
  • Catherine21
    Catherine21 Online Community Member Posts: 9,632 Championing

    Thankyou for sharing that i wiah i could believe that they would put an element of understanding and properly trained staff on board those assessements give many of us ptsd

  • SwiftFox
    SwiftFox Online Community Member Posts: 827 Championing

    Where would you like the cuts to be, there has to be some sort of cut or whole thing will stop.

  • Catherine21
    Catherine21 Online Community Member Posts: 9,632 Championing
  • Adrian_Scope
    Adrian_Scope Posts: 14,403 Online Community Programme Lead

    Afternoon @Catherine21, I think Swiftfox’s question may have been in relation to @MadMilan2019’s comment which discussed reversing the cuts.

    I agree though, it can be difficult to find the energy and it’s okay to oppose the cuts and not have an answer as to how the government could balance that in budgets.

    I’ve also sent you a quick PM, please look out for it.