News

Who decides who can work and who not? The patient or the fascist government❓❓❓❓

I've emailed my MP (one of the original "rebels") to ask that he seeks clarification regarding the promise made to "protect" existing PIP recipients now that Clause 5 has been conveniently removed from the bill.   With that clause gone, the amended bill CANNOT include a pledge to not apply THOSE changes to existing claims - leaving the field wide open to apply as many changes as they like from any new system or even a completely new benefit (a new benefit lets them class us all as making a NEW CLAIM and they carefully retained the ability to attack new claims).

I've also asked that he recommends an extension to all existing PIP claims - add five years to each and have NO reassessments without a specific changes of circumstances during that time.  This will give them time to sort themselves out and will take pressure of the DWP and others who will be dealing with the rushed UC migration plus a rush of new claims (aimed at avoiding the new rules) plus having to train for and implement new system etc etc.  They put reassessments on hold during covid so this is hardly a new or insane suggestion.   It will also give us a breathing space and time to plan ahead, put a few quid away etc if the new systems are clearly going to do exactly what kendall wanted all along.

Just a word of warning and something you may need to URGENTLY raise with your MPs before next week's third reading, with the government's promised amendments in place....

By pulling Clause 5 - completely removing the proposed changes to PIP eligibility - the government also removed the previous "promise" to not apply Clause 5 to existing recipients - they can't agree to not apply a clause that doesn't even exists.   They then said that they want to create a NEW assessment with NEW scoring.     

Put that all together and it's obvious what's going to happen.  It will clearly become impossible to have two completely different assessments running - this won't just be the same test with the same allocation of points having a different outcome depending on circumstances - so existing recipients WILL face the NEW tests when reassessed.    It's clear that this new test - when created - WILL be used to remove PIP in exactly the same way that Clause 5 intended.

Clause 5 wasn't pulled as a concession - it was pulled because it no longer suited the government to ONLY attack new claimants.   The timing of pulling it was a SCAM - designed to confuse potential rebels ahead of this vote.

So - we NEED to know - BEFORE THIS BILL BACK IN PARLIAMENT NEXT WEEK - when would the new system be applied and will existing PIP recipients be given any sort of GUARANTEE that we will not all find ourselves being treated as NEW CLAIMANTS for some COMPLETELY NEW benefit in 2030 - and stripped of our support en-masse.   And if it is only the assessment that changes, did MPs actually just hand the whole of the original Clause 5 back to Kendall unchanged - negating the "concessions" that MPs and others THINK they had in the bag?

Incidentally - why was liz kendall dressed-up as a dentist yesterday and will she also wear fancy dress today?  :)

The BBC's Economics Editor, Faisal Islam skillfully sums-up why the WR Bill is such a disaster for Labour and indirectly says that it needs to be pulled.    In short - he says that they were perfectly placed to make worthwhile change - a huge majority and at least five years to carefully tailor a new welfare system and instead, they just chased quick and ill-conceived CUTS.   This is harsh - less than 90 seconds of calm, logical talking from an economics experts really gets to the core of this issue - that this bill never was about "welfare reform" and kendall has basically gone rogue.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cr799vmgpnmo

The tories have confirmed that they will vote against the bill (not clear if that's being whipped or not).   It seems that Labour MPs will be the only ones voting for the bill - meaning that the bill can still be stopped dead by 80-odd Labour "rebels" and/or abstentions.    There's was clearly no real support for  the bill amongst Labour MPs in the chamber today - it remains to be seen if that translates to voting it down - especially as at least one minister today refused to state that no-one would be thrown out of the party for doing so but on that score - if Labour did dump 80-odd MPs, they'd be throwing away their entire majority - which is unthinkable.

I didn't think kendall did herself any favours - she sounded panicked and twitchy, reminding me of Theresa May and her hilariously awful "Nothing has changed!" meltdown speech  or truSS screeching that she's the only soldier marching in step.   She made one good point - that a number of other benefits already have different rules for new and old claimants but she just couldn't counter question after question about why she couldn't just stop this mess and start again from scratch.   One specific question really hit home - would people with "fluctuating conditions" be treated as making "new claims" for PIP each time and penalised and she had to admit that they would.   She got very tetchy with Jeremy Corbyn - downright rude in fact.    And for some strange reason, she turned up to Parliament dressed as a dentist ;)

The disabled have won nothing yet. We cannot trust the government not to do something underhand. I have no trust in them at all, they need to leave these benefits alone as I feel they will have more suicides on there hands due to the stress and worry they are being put through.

It says on scope those who already get full pip wont be affected only new claiments i,m due a review in jan 2027 as an exsisting claiment surely they car,nt bring in that 4 point rule to exsisting claiments 

Timms new PIP assessment system with changes to descriptors and points is now going to finalised in Autumn 2026 and then implement as soon as possible. 

My assessment is due for review in Feb 2027 but it will be done, no doubt the year before Feb 2026 as that's a new application for assessment will I have to go under the new 4 point scheme?

I have an ongoing award which is due for re-assessment in 2028, if my claim is migrated to UC before that, will I be treated as a new claimant or a continuity claimant?

With perfect timing, SCOPE have produced their "Disability Price Tag" report in which they calculate the additional cost of living for disabled people...

"What did the 2025 Disability Price Tag report find?

Our latest findings show that disabled households need an extra £1,095 each month. This is just to have the same standard of living as non-disabled households.

As inflation is expected to rise over the next five years so the extra costs of disability, reaching £1,224 per month by 2029 to 2030 financial year.

This comes as the Government plans to rip billions from the welfare budget."

The conclude by saying that....

"If the Government goes ahead with the proposed reforms, by 2029 to 2030 more than 400,000 disabled people will be left facing extra disability related costs with no support, or very limited support, from PIP

Cuts will push disabled people in a more precarious financial position into deep poverty. This will harm their health, reducing their ability to work and participating independently in social and civic activities.

We urge the government to change course and listen to disabled people".

Feel free to forward this to your MP - there is still time (and a need) to stop this bill.

https://www.scope.org.uk/campaigns/disability-price-tag

The Guardian reports that the government is still "refusing" to say that labour will not suspend or otherwise penalise their MPs who vote against the welfare reform bill.   They also say that although there had been a generally positive reaction from the rebels and many had said they would support the amended bill, there is another wave of disquiet now as the full impact of having a "two tier" welfare state is sinking in.  Having Andy Bunham and Sadiq Khan join calls to kill the bill has also attracted attention and there are a number of Labour MPs saying that they will not make their mind up on which way to vote until they see - in writing - the proposed government amendment.  

They also state that they have had an answer from the DWP to a key question regarding people still in receipt of DLA and it's as expected - anyone currently on DLA who moves to PIP after the November 2026 threshold will be treated as having made a NEW CLAIM and will therefore be subject to the 2nd Class Citizen rules.   The DWP says that those DLA recipients are free to voluntarily "apply to transfer to PIP" - which is as weasel-worded as it gets, given that had already confirmed that you CAN'T "transfer", you have to make a new claim, which means you could potentially fail to qualify and lose everything - or maybe you'll get lucky and get more money - or anywhere in-between - it's all part of the new and improved Welfare Lottery.   

This is why I warned that we need definitive details and GUARANTEES on dozens of questions that may not even occur to MPs as yet - such as, what happens if the managed migration from legacy benefits falls behind, perhaps due to backlogs created by a rush to register new claims or voluntary migrations?   I know the government says it AIMS to get the managed migrations completed in time - but Section 4 of the bill is entirely devoted to the "legacy benefits" which they are saying won't exist by November 2926, suggesting that they have little faith in their own "plans".

HOW IS THE GUARENTEE ONLY FIT FOR 3 YEARS I have an ongoing award 

The HoC briefing papers now contain an entry which acknowledges but does not detail the proposed government amendments....
>the new Personal Independence Payment daily living ‘four-point’ requirement will only be implemented for new claimants from November 2026

Heads-up...

"After 3.30pm: Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, is expected to make a statement to MPs about the government concessions on the UC and Pip bill." - from the Guardian website.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/further-details-on-welfare-reforms-published-ahead-of-second-reading

Just a heads-up...

If you are planning on watching the Welfare Reform Bill debate live on Tuesday (if it isn't cancelled due to lack of intellect), maybe tune in earlier - because from 11:30am onwards, MPs get to question rachel reeves and I can't help thinking that "welfare reform" will be a hot topic.

Someone keeps downvoting my perfectly reasonable and polite posts just because I'm quite correctly saying that - so far - no amendment has been submitted by the government and until and unless that happens and we know for certain what an amended bill looks like, there are no definitive answers to any of the questions about what happens next to any of us.   At this point, we only know that the ORIGINAL WR bill is due for second reading and we know that the ORIGINAL "reasoned amendment" application has been withdrawn.   We are told that the government will be submitting an amendment - we only have their word for that and we only have some rather vague descriptions on what may be different - the devil is in the detail and it only takes one line of text in there to make the amended bill even worse than the original.  We are also told that "around 50" MPs have signed a new "reasoned amendment" which would now call for the bill to be totally blocked regardless of any tweaks the government may make.   

I'm not sure why that's upset anyone - I am merely stating plain facts.  I assume it's upset someone who is posting "facts" that are actually assumptions based on interpreting the above letter and some press reports - none of which form any part of any legislation that can be voted on in Parliament.

So as it stands - NOTHING HAS CHANGED.   It is extremely likely that there will be some changes made before the debate is due to start in Tuesday and there are only limited options available.

1> The government tries to push through the original bill
2> The government tables an amendment and MPs vote on that version of the bill
3> The Reasoned Amendment is allowed and is voted on before the WR Bill's second reading - meaning the bill itself is stopped dead regardless of how it was or wasn't amended
4> The government pulls the bill entirely.

The press has mostly gone quiet on this but there are reports that the government was working flat out through Saturday and last night to try to persuade party rebels to support an amended bill BUT word is that fifty-odd Labour rebels are putting their name to the new Reasoned Amendment application - that's reportedly in addition to the non-Labour names like corbyn.   There's also said to be a number of other Labour MPs still willing to vote against the bill or to abstain.  It's not known if there's still enough "rebels" to overturn the government majority but the party leadership is said to still be concerned.   Most importantly, government insiders are talking about possibly making more concessions - they are still "negotiating".   This may help explain why there's still no amendment - because what's been proposed so far is either not enough or is not worded clearly enough - plus, of course, there's still a hardcore of MPs including rebels who feel that creating a "two tier"system is totally and utterly unacceptable.

And finally, for those telling us that we should be grateful that the expected amendment exempts us from the "four point rule" and a couple of key changes to UC - those proposals only apply to "existing claims" and as we're seeing with UC and previously with the DLA>PIP migration, the process actually involved being FORCED to make a NEW CLAIM for the new benefits - the fact that the claims were "linked" was a procedural one - the claims themselves were NEW.   So you may think you are safe because your "existing" claim is "protected" but it is extremely likely that the government's next move will be to replace PIP with yet another NEW benefit - at which point, all current awards are null and void, as they were when you moved from DLA to PIP - at which point, we will ALL be "NEW claimants".   This is why the whole bill has to be stopped NOW - so that all disabled people and all MPs and other involved parties are working together, from the same hymn-sheet.   We are being divided against ourselves - a couple of years down the line, the government will announce PIP MK2 and that one will make "New PIP" claimants slightly better off whilst massively harming "Old PIP" ones - at which point, we'll wish those "New PIP" lot were supporting us and not saying "Tough luck - you weren't there for us", which is what we'll deserve if we abandon them now.

And because I'm a nice guy - here's a link to the bill showing exactly what Parliament is currently set to debate on Tuesday - and it clearly specifies, "Current version of the Bill Bill 267 2024-25 (as introduced).   That's THE ORIGINAL BILL - because in every legal and constitutional sense - NOTHING HAS CHANGED.  You can also see that there are no amendments pending - because the original "reasoned amendment" has now been officially withdrawn and no new proposed amendments have been submitted by any party.  https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3988

Why do so many people think it’s a win! This divide & rule tactic is only a temporary measure. Starmer knows that f2f assessments will reduce the number of existing claimants anyway. F2f assessments are designed to be tougher and most claimants are tougher and most claimants are unsuccessful.