Phone call with MP next week on welfare reform - Delete if not appropriate

Like many of us I imagine, I've been doing a fair bit of shouting about the inhuman welfare reform proposals. My MP wants to have a private 1 on 1 call with me next week, this is just before he goes off to a local conference from concerned constituents.

I've agreed to the call, though my anxiety will kill me in the lead up to it.

Is there anything specific I should talk about - I have a lot of facts and figures, but I want to be clear and concise and... well I feel as if the moment I answer the phone I'll forget how to talk.

Any advice would be appreciated and I am dreadfully sorry if this thread isn't appropriate for the forum, please delete if so.

Thanks
Will

Proud of you, this is wonderful..wishing you so well with this!! xx

Well, I had the call earlier - his secretary phoned ahead to confirm and we talked for just over 15 minutes as he had other calls to make and two round-table discussions on this issue at 4pm and 5pm.

I explained to him why I had left labour over this, and I explained the reasons I could physically be no part of these labour plans - Which he seemed to view as if they were an idea, something we can change, almost like it's still in the drafting stage. In fact at one point he actually agreed with me when I said "The writings on the wall here really and it's ridiculous to carry on pretending not to see it"

I made the point that all the plans are too broad, you cannot treat an 18 year old with mental health issues the same as a 45 year old with spinal issues, nor can you treat any two people the same. My point was the legislation was too broad - He agreed with this and again seemed to think it would be something to add.

I spoke of my experience of mental health (I have a masters) and he explained that he thinks it's still Covid - That some people still haven't gotten over the lockdowns.

He said the biggest issue is that 1 in 8 18-24 year olds are currently "Out of work", he did not specific that they were claiming disability benefits.

I told him that I think it's cruel and punitive to reduce people's universal credit when they already have increased costs and difficult lives, that I didn't vote to make the poor poorer and the sick sicker (And in my area - Scunthorpe, MP Nik Dakin) He seemed to agree and also seemed somewhat surprised to hear about the universal credit change - as though I was telling him for the first time.

We agreed that the policy as it stands is not "Labour" and it's not what we stand for. But when I asked him if there was a vote tomorrow would you vote for or against he did the politicians answer of "Talk around the topic for 2 minutes" - So I asked him again directly and he said he didn't know.

He said he didn't want to become one of the 42 "Rebel" MP's as he believes they're doing it for political advancement or attention and he doesn't want that.

My suggestion was that the current plans are scrapped and something new is drafted, something which is more specific to a persons needs - for instance a 18-24 year old claiming on mental health grounds could be signposted for some free therapy - but I stressed this had to be optional. That someone who's been in an accident or had a physical injury could be signposted for physiotherapy. I suggested that this theoretical new version be drafted with expert help from various disability and illness charities. He seemed to agree with me.

I complained about the £1Bn supposedly going to be spent getting disabled people back into work as I said to him "how many remote working jobs are there here? How many employers willing to make potentially expensive adaptations just to accommodate us?". He gave a much firmer agreement when I said "We need to see that the jobs actually exist first".

Overall I could have been happier with his responses, they were very non-committal as you'd expect from a back bencher. But I mentioned even today Citizen's Advice and their damning report "Pathways to Poverty" - He seemed to feel that this was defeated, and that it had started a larger conversation - One in which he wants me to have a say in (As I clearly know more than him, and I stressed that even with a masters in mental health, I cannot create something fair for people with spinal injuries for example, because I don't know or understand their needs, this is why expert input is essential.

We agreed that in it's current form this bill is unfair and discriminatory, that it "isn't labour" and "It's not who we want to be". Yet at the same time if there was a vote tomorrow he might vote for it.

I have a feeling he may have spent the evening getting the same anger in person.

But I did the best I can do, as expected I almost forgot how to speak but, my anger and my passion to protect my friend got the better of me and I found myself being polite, but passionate.

Thank you for this.