DWP reform - where we are now (on 8/3/25) & possible steps once gov makes official announcement

Large scale public backlash

I’m going to keep this post short as honestly whether there is large public backlash to things like disability welfare cuts and tightened criteria is a lot out of our communities control

You need a public audience to be able to get your message across (media and newspaper reporting being the biggest, most effective) and starmer is likely on a first name basis with most of the editors

I’ll post this snippet from my post from early today from the welfare reform master thread on my opinion of starmer and labours current tactics as I think it’s relevant

One plus side is labour don’t have the media favouritism in the same ways the tories did - the far right papers may still go after starmer and co (I recommend reading some of the comments on the far right GB News recent articles on welfare - a surprising amount of understanding posters or at least a little common sense - I get the impression that starmer may have declared welfare reforms the number one location for cuts in his speech last not but a significant number of fair right have us ranked 4th to 8th in treasury raid locations.

My recommendation is to chat to people out and about if you feel safe to (there’s been a couple of instances in my local area of disabled getting harassed so your safety is the priority here) and if you are a good writer prehaps try emailing newspapers and tv news (prehaps even the editors of dispatches and panarama)

Though prehaps I’m throwing in the towel too easily on this bullet point….

firstly I promise you that your username did not pop up in my head once in any posts I’ve written in the last week or so

I figured a lot of the longer term scope members were taking a break from the forum whilst this current rumor and news overload was going on - it’s kind of mad out there and ‘timeouts’ are a sensible response

Second - my heart sinks every time I read one of these posts from you where I’ve unintentionally touched a nerve and upset you - these heated discussions you and me have really stress me out and I really feel uncomfortable with confrontation (I’m not sure of your age but I get the impression that there is an generational age gap between us which can be difficult to bridge, but I think I’ve mentioned in the past that my memory is horrendous and history knowledge is terrible - your grasp on history is obviously better then mine)

I know you’re not a fan of Davey but can’t it be okay that I still believe in the guy

Starmer is very lucky to have your support as I don’t think many of the community feels that way about him at this moment - didn’t I say to you before that I didn’t trust the people and advisers starmers currently surrounded by and it’s possible he’s following much bad advice. I was very much team starmer till a year or 2 back around the time he promoted the likes of reeves of Kendall to prominent shadow cabinet positions - if starmer goes full circle back to his 2017 self then I will be thrilled

In terms of abrahams people can change a lot in a decade (just look at some of the Americans current prominent figure viewpoints to 10 years back)

I was planning to write in a later planned post that my legal knowledge is patchy (though I have stumbled across some stories of dodgy lawyers/solicitors ‘helping’ claimants try to bring their case to court) - there’s no solid advice on putting together a claimant case to the high courts or elsewhere and staying safe doing so - - and reading around a reading resource like that would be of use to a number of disabled that wonder if it’s a step they can take. There’s very little legal advice I would feel okay with typing and there’s certainly no lawyer or solicitor I can personally recommend (only a list of past claimant vs dwp security of state over the past 10 odd years that case made it to court) - if you’ve got knowledge in this area then please share as it could help other members

But I get the impression that you don’t agree with people like myself trying to encourage to take action - and are of the school of thought currently of leave things along and see if things natural resolve - but can’t the 2 theories co exist and be separate to one another?

I’m going to be blunt - I get the impression you don’t like me, nor think I am very bright and you probably wish ppl like me would find elsewhere to spread our views

I started this thread to try and other members with a desire to be proactive if welfare reforms are as challenging as feared and spare my time creating resources if that would help others

But I don’t have the energy to carry on repeating the same heated discussion - I have too much going on in my own life right now

please be direct and just tell me via post or DM if you’d rather I step away from the forum for the next month or so until politically things concerning welfare is no longer front page news because you think I’m stirring trouble and I’m 99% sure this thread will die naturally (no need for a mod to close it)

any member that still wants to chat is welcome to DM me with any requests

But honestly I’m exhausted and don’t like being places I’m clearly not wanted (if even by a few - as I said, hate confrontation)

first off thank you for this post, it’s much appreciated

In all honestly if we could bin all 650mps and start from stratch I would write that idea off (every individual has politicians they like and those they don’t and very little consensus)

I think ppl forget how different uk generations are from one another and how where you live (rural vs suburbs vs urban, consistencies, area trade, class born into, etc….. can hugely impact a persons views) - I’ve lived the majority of my life in rural farming hotspots that are traditionally Tory (the colour red is basically banned)

I think you told me before that yourself and your family have voted labour all your life - obviously I don’t know the history of the places you’ve called home but I’ve known a lot of ppl who have been unwaveringly loyal to the tories at every moment in history and the last thing I’d call them is wrong or stubborn for doing so as a lot of the lifelong voters are certainly not ‘blindly voting’, they have valid reason based on personal circumstances and yes they will defend their party mps but may comment to private circles when ‘a political decision is made that isn’t straightforward to understand’

Also I think for many on this forum, uk politics may have not attracted our attention in big flashing lights until the brexit referendum in 2016 (for me I was a student for most of the blair years and Iraq war kind of overshadowed everything else political for my age group, and in the brown and 1st half of the Cameron gov I was going through the toughest years of my life and a lot is a blur - the other thing is that I personally didn’t start having major issues with the dwp till about 9 years (I don’t know if where I used to live had an effect but welfare was still a safety net back the, the job centre still had disability specialists and you actually got a f2f with a qualified gp…….good times) - dealing with the dwp now if like dealing with loan sharks and the mafia………..you get your safety net but you almost need to sign ownership of your life over (I don’t think politicians release how many of us would ditch welfare the moment we can scrap by independently)

Look at the times we can leave certain our personal hot topics at the door I actually enjoy some of our conversations we have here - but it’s okay sharing opinions and standpoints but calling out someone else’s opinion you don’t agree with as ‘wrong’ (even if their reasoning are ‘crackers’) may not be the most helpful response - by all means share a viewpoint but some things are left best unsaid depending on recipient.

but your memory and knowledge of pre 2015? Is obviously better than a lot of us ‘younger’ members - if you remember and relevant presidents to any of the discussions here then please share (some younger members get easily disillusioned and hopeless - I think many would appreciate hearing past examples of when the disabled did not live up to the ‘easy target’ stereotype many seem to label us with, and realise it’s not a self fulfilling prophecy if you don’t allow it to be

lastly on the topic of starmer, I know why you stand where you stand and understand your reasonings - but I hope you also understand why some members have lost faith in him even if you don’t agree with their reasoning and think it’s too early for reactionary flips of opinion

(Other members reading this let’s not start a ‘starmer, boo, hiss’ influx of posts - it’s getting a little repetitive across the forum)

@Whatthe - I think I mentioned to you before that even though I can’t support starmers public actions/decisions on things like welfare now I don’t think it’s as simple as the popular opinion of starmer fooling ppl or being dishonest

I do think a lot is going on behind closed doors and something more complex going on - I think most of us can agree that starmer is not a natural (or career) politican and at the labour leadership contest a lot of us supported him

I’m having a huge problem stomaching some of his recent quotes, esp after reading his personal history and the simple opinion would be to conclude he’s just used his skills as a lawyer (doing and saying whatever you need to do to get the win regardless of whether client is right or wrong)

However something just isn’t sitting well with me nor adding up - we got leaks of quotes from over the weekend that portray’s him one way and then we today he makes a point of having a disabled mother and brother and that he understands how our community is feeling

Prehaps starmer has chameleon Oscar winning acting chops…….or multiple personality disorder

but You once told me something along the lines of you think he’s getting bad advice or someone else is making the decisions (anyone familiar with ‘yes, minister’ and ‘yes, prime minister’ knows that the pm is rarely the most powerful person in or working for gov……………Boris Johnson tenure is an excellent example of this) and just because you’re smart doesn’t mean all smart ppl are immune to manipulation

This is off topic for this thread but I’ve been doing a little reading up on Morgan mcsweeney and specifically ‘labour together’ and I’m happy to post my thoughts and findings (if you haven’t already done your own research)

I’m not going to lie- it’s best for the disabled community if labour can stay a viable voting option on the table

And if the possibility of starmer changing the direction labour seem to be going (and refresh’s both cabinet and adviser team) is possible then that would be my preference over starmer being ousted and/or labour becoming unvotable like the tories last ge

The country needs stability, but some of the proposed methods labour have presented so fair the costs are just too high and there are other ways

Legal challenges/class action suits against dwp security of state/government (most likely from human rights groups or disability activist organisations) - I’ll talk about this more in a future post (I’m not sure that tribunals/upper tribunals can come into play before a policy is implemented)

Okay this is the said future post!

I’m am somewhat limited on what I can write here and the advice I can give

One reason is scope most likely don’t want legal action discussed on the forum (if any scope mods are reading this would they be open to the idea of an invite only **** topic area - somewhere to provide a safe place to list the stages of a high court case beginning to end and even tribunals (which can be the trigger to the dwp being ordered to change a specific point criteria for one of the activities on wca/pip assessment paperwork) - it would also be good to have a vetted list of contacts that are safe for members to reach out to to ask further questions - finding advice on how to start looking into high court suits against dwp is like finding a needle in a haystack and as a couple of members have already pointed some organisations which on paper look like they are safe places to ask for help may have different intentions and may even abuse the situation - for me it’s vital the disabled community have a reputable safe place to go that can offer safe recommendations and redirections.

Secondly I am not a lawyer nor have I studied law (or human rights) and neither is any of my immediate family (like a handful of others I’m not so if there may be ‘a friend of a friend’ resource personally - but officially I know no one in my real world well enough to ask the questions.

first bit of advice is to stay safe if you are thinking of taking this next step

Second is even if you are taking action ‘alone’ make sure you have a support system

Thirdly the gov and dwp are not invincible (especially when they aren’t in the right) there has been many precedents of David ‘beating’ Goliath - see below for the most comprehensive list of significant tribunals and high court cases claimants have taken out in recent years

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/how-we-can-help/benefits-information/law-pages/case-law-summaries/court-decision-summaries?srsltid=AfmBOoq9DKj2-x42LwMjXex0C1pU9WPnm5oqNgnz4ezclxgNMgeTYvVg

for example the ‘MM v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (PIP): [2018] UKUT 193 (AAC)’ case is still resulting in claimants getting award backpay as I think dwp are still looking in thousands of claimants pip awards for 2016? to 2019 to check if this applies to each claimant (backpay potentially worth thousands)

so both high court cases and tribunals (from claimants appealing an award decision) can hugely benefit large numbers of the disabled community which is huge

now I know a lot of ppl wouldn’t even consider legal action for a number of reasons:

• they’d need to oust their identity - yes there are ppl like Ellen Clifford that give their full name and who’s cases are very public but it’s also very common to just use your initials and your lawyers releases statements on behalf of the plaintiff
• There is too much to personally lose - right now many won’t launch things like tribunals as they could lose a lesser award worst case. If the itv leaks are true and aren’t changed by the gov then many of us may shift into the ‘nothing left to lose category’………………..right now only a max of 10% of failed pip award claims take their case to tribunal (some of the figure includes those successful in a low award but are appealing for higher). I know that law cases like tribunals are long winded and stressful but it sends a very loud message to the dwp (and appeals/court cases cost dwp millions to defend - something that looks stupid when evidence shows dwp observably in the wrong)
• You’d have to speak in court - I think whoever is defending you (such as lawyers) and/or advocates can do a lot of the heavy lifting in talking
• You have to be a plaintiff by yourself - you need a ‘lead’ plaintiff that will need to be ‘named’ but others can jump on (eg……. ‘AZ and others vs security of state for work and pensions’ is a possible title (please note this isn’t the name of a real case, just an example of what a case could be named)

so in terms of the early stages (pre high court stage), I think the stages are as roughly follows:

• carefully read the government green paper (and things like human right laws) and consider if there may be a possible case against the dwp - much harder to argue than you think, I’ll give a example after these bullet points.
• Contact a lawyer or organisation and see if you do indeed have a case - now there are those that are pro Bono but those resources are limited, esp right now - many will require to be paid (for example the waspi woman crowdfunded £150K to fund their latest high court case) - this is where group action may be helpful
• Any case needs to get submitted to the high courts before even getting getting accepted as a case. The majority get rejected before the case officially reaches the high courts

Now for example (and this is currently a fictional example) if the gov was trying to pass legislation to heavily tighten pip/lcwra criteria (so 80%+ lost significant payments) and employers made clear they didn’t want to hire disabled people over fully abled (and there weren’t enough job vacancies for both groups plus add if the assisted dying bill gets its legislation passed with little change to its current form in the meantime - - - surely the 2 + 2 that is already being feared by many disabled would be a slam dunk human rights issue which would easily be accepted by a court right?

Sadly I don’t think that would be enough (a lawyer or human rights specialist would confirm this) - however if an impact assessment was done and it was found that claimants with money cut and being pressured to look for work (which didn’t exist) were then getting pressured to consider state assisted suicide (and that law had no safeguards for ‘lifelong’ disabilities with no cure like Down’s syndrome………..and even things like autism (which would be madness for anyone to even entertain if they hadn’t been following the committee stage for that bill - mad times indeed) as a ‘solution’ - that impact assessment may be what pushes things over the edge on whether you have a legit case to present to court

obviously I haven’t been able to give a lot of info (and members/mods may want to correct a few points I’ve not understood correctly but touch wood it’s a correct intro to an intro on this very complex subject and once again stay safe