Many amendments have been tabled for the third reading of the Universal Credit and Personal independence Payment Bill.  There are now 18 pages of detailed amendments,  some on behalf of the government and some on behalf of those opposing the bill.

Below are a selection of the amendments. 

4-point rule

Government amendment (Gov 4) removes clause 5 – the PIP 4 point rule – from the bill.  If this is accepted (which it will be) it will be the end of the 4-point rule, unless it is resurrected in the Timms review which seems unlikely.

UC freeze

A new clause put forward by the government (Gov NC1) provides for the freeze to the universal health element not to apply to existing claimant, people who meet the severe conditions criteria and terminally ill patients.  This was one of the government’s earlier concessions to the rebels.

Name

Even the name of the bill is now subject to a government amendment (Gov 5), which would remove the words “and personal independence payment” from the title of the bill.  If the amendment passes, the bill will be the Universal Credit Bill.

Severe conditions criteria

Labour MP Graeme Downie has tabled an amendment (17) which relates to an issue that Benefits and Work has been highlighting.  The severe conditions criteria (SCC) as currently written require claimants to prove they meet the SCC “constantly”

Constantly is defined in the Bill as “at all times” or “on all occasions on which the claimant undertakes or attempts to undertake the activity”.

However, many degenerative conditions such as Parkinson’s, multiple sclerosis and muscular dystrophy follow a slow path of decreasing ability, with periods of remission.  

At present, the bill would prevent people in these circumstances getting the higher payments and freedom from reassessment that the SCC provide, long after it is certain they will never work again.

The amendment would allow for the SCC to apply to claimants who have fluctuating conditions, such as Parkinson’s or multiple sclerosis.

Private doctors

An amendment (33) by SNP MP Kirsty Blackman, removes the requirement that, for the severe conditions criteria (SCC), a diagnosis must have been made by a health professional providing NHS services.  Many people are forced to resort to a private diagnosis because the NHS waiting list for an assessment for their condition is years long.  As the bill stands, having a private diagnosis only, appears to bar claimants from the SCC.

Date of UC cuts

An amendment (19) brought forward by work and pensions committee chair Debbie Abrahams, changes the date on which the universal credit cuts start, from April 2026 to November 2026.

More reports

A proposed new clause by LibDem MP Steve Darling would prevent most of the Bill coming into force until a range of reports and consultations had been completed.

What happens next

In a likely chaotic session on 9 July, these amendments – or as many as there are time for -will be considered by a committee of the whole House and voted on before a final vote on the whole bill, as amended, takes place.

The Speaker will make a decision on whether the Bill will be certified as a money bill only after all the amendments that are agreed have been included in the bill and it is now in its final form.

If it passes the commons, the bill will then be sent to the House of Lords. However, if it is certified asa money bill then the Lords will have no power to oblige the Commons to consider any amendments they suggest and the bill will automatically become law after a month.

You can download the latest amendments from a link on this page.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    Saw this worrying post on z2k trusts twitter feed. Not surprised by it.

    1/5: We're very worried that the Timms Review of PIP promised by the government will fall far short of genuine coproduction

    2/5: It was always the case that the Timms Review would engage with disabled people.

    The government has not explained how the new commitment to co-production will differ from its original plans for the Review

    3/5: Co-production should mean that disabled people have equal decision-making power.

    But we already have concerns that disabled people are not being meaningfully involved in the Review

    4/5: One of our disabled clients attended a Timms Review meeting last week - supposedly to help co-produce the terms of reference.

    She was shocked to then discover that those terms had already been finalised and published the same day.

    5/5: The government must urgently set out the detail of how the Review will be co-produced with disabled people.

    Without a clear definition, this important concession risks becoming empty rhetoric.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @tintack The problem will come after the next GE. Assuming there's a right wing coalition, the Times review will be the basis of new cuts, which will pass (assuming we don't have a minority Government). And I fear some charities will go along with the Timms review wholesale 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @Dee
      If they're trying to stitch up the Timms review at this early stage it's good that we hear about it and have the chance to put pressure on whoever gets involved in this "co-production". Better that than to believe we're getting somewhere only to have a stitch-up of a review foisted on us at the last minute. 

      It's probably not the politically smartest thing for the government to do (though when has that ever stopped them), given that a complete failure to listen to their own MPs on this issue is what got them into this mess in the first place - if they try to turn the Timms review into a stitch-up from the start that is not likely to endear them to those Labour MPs who were willing to sign the reasoned amendment and another major rebellion will probably kick off. Of course, if it is a stitch-up then whichever groups are involved need to have the backbone to walk away and say publicly why they've done so rather than roll over and allow themselves to be used as a political fig leaf by the government.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    I see from the BBC there is HYS on whether the government will abandon the triple lock on state pensions; there's the proposals to reduce the SEND provision for disabled children, and the cuts in universal credit and the Timms review into PIP.

    Essentially, whoever is in power over the next decade, the welfare state as we have become used to is, will disappear.  It'll be very basic, and very restrictive. If I were 18 again (and fully sighted) I would be training to be either a brickie, a plumber, electrician etc.  AI is going to destroy office jobs (ask any recent Graduates about job searching).  Schools are going to have to change radically.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    Once Timms has completed his review (Autumn 2026), what stages and where does the review have to go, (lords/committee etc, before it's passed (or is it just down to Timms/Kendall. It bothered me that Kendall said it would be implemented asap. 
    After all, we do know they are keen on rushing things through.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    I heard back from Neil Coyle who is one of the MPs on the APPG on Ending the Need for Food Banks.  His reply after my email relating to the SCC cuts of the health element for new claimants:

    Thank you for writing to me about welfare reform. Apologies for the delayed response. I deal with a huge volume of issues every week, including addressing people’s immediate housing or benefits needs and my team works hard to deal with extremely hard to deal with extremely high levels of correspondence and casework.

    I have worked on social security matters for twenty years and previously ran Disability Alliance, a charity which helped 500,000 disabled people and carers a hear, as well as chairing the Disability Benefits Consortium. I am very familiar with the issues involved from my previous jobs, from family experience and as a member of the Work and Pensions Select Committee until last year.

    Sadly, some of the headlines have scared people about the proposals which is a shame as disability organisations and disabled people have campaigned for some of the measures for some time. Scrapping the Work Capability Assessment has huge support and has been sought by disability organisations for over a decade. Additional employment support has also been an ‘ask’ of organisations and Ministers are pledging £1 billion in additional help which is fantastic news. I believe disability equality will be best measured by seeing a rise in the employment rate of disabled people and I am glad that disability organisations have welcomed this measure.

    Whilst I have some concerns about how changes to Personal Independence Payments might be made, there will be more people receiving this help after the Government’s plans are implemented than now: both spending and the number of people accessing PIP will rise.

    For most disabled people, there will ultimately be no change. Some will gain with higher payment levels of different support – and people who cannot work will also receive additional protections.

    I hope my response is useful and reassures you that I am focusing on this issue – as ever – but please let me know if you have any specific follow-up questions or issues you’d like to raise.

    Thank you once again for contacting me about this issue.



    PS – HELP IN THE COST OF LIVING CRISIS: I’ve developed a guide to help for anyone experiencing the ‘Cost of Living’ crisis which is online at: www.tinyurl.com/NC-COLC with practical information on benefits, mortgages, energy, internet costs and much more. Please share it with anyone who might welcome the extra help!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @Dee
      "Scrapping the Work Capability Assessment has huge support and has been sought by disability organisations for over a decade."

      But replacing it with a system in which receipt of PIP daily living becomes the qualifying criterion for the UC health element does not have "huge support", not least because if this were applied to existing claimants, the 600,000 of us who currently get UC health but not PIP daily living would lose our UC health and be completely and utterly screwed.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    Slightly different tangent from me on this occasion. I want to congratulate and thank all of you on being the most amazing people. Between us we have shown that unity and protest can make wider society sit up and take notice.

    The only cavate to my stated intention above, is to highlight other cuts being made. In Oxfordshire therapeutic art classes and at least one Restore service, (that i know of) have been cut. The specific Restore service, was a day attendance centre/therapeutic community. 
    A valuable place for those who are trying to re integrate with social interaction, in a safe, managed and supportive environment. 

    You all know how hard it is to avoid disability isolation. Even if, you are lucky enough to have a support network of family and friends, the fear and feeling of isolation is understood nonetheless.  

    I cannot see any remanence of the Labour party that introduced the NHS and welfare safety nets for those who have need, at the point of need. 
    I also realise there are some alternatives, but this is not the case across the wider UK.

    Whether we have won a battle or the war, remains to be seen.

    You are incredibly resilient people, please remember that   
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 days ago
    A child poverty expert was on BBC Breakfast just now, quite reasonably advocating for the removal of the two child benefit cap. With it being the 'impartial' BBC, of course, they did their damnedest to get her to shift 'the blame' for the government's 'inability to help' onto the disabled rather than to Reeves' refusal to impose a wealth tax.

    Thankfully the expert saw through that little ploy and point-blank refused to play along. But I'm sure we can expect much more of this from them for the foreseeable future.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    Whistleblowers, The former assessors, who worked for companies contracted by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), also said they were pressured to downgrade the number of points needed to qualify for PIP.

    Former benefits assessors say there is pressure to meet impossible targets and lower points.  

    Has told The i Paper that intense pressure to hit daily targets for personal independence payment (PIP) cases meant health assessments were “rushed and superficial”.










    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @Whistleblower PIP assessor if the assessors had done their job truthfully and awarded the correct points in the first place people would not have to resort to going to tribunal costing the goverment even more money the sun newspaper said it was disgraceful so many claiments was getting awards at tribunal realy ask why the dwp put preasure on the assessors to fail claiments in the first place 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @JHF "Citizens Advice advised me to over exaggerate my conditions"
      I hope you did not follow their advice to commit benefit fraud.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @Whistleblower PIP assessor Anyone that has gone through the pip assessment knows this to be true. When I did my pip assessment 1.5 years ago, I had Citizens Advice to help me fill out the form. Citizens Advice advised me to over exaggerate my conditions as the DWP rob points from claimants. The only people that do not know about the robbery of points is those that are not going through the pip process and apparently, the Government.

      I believe that without saying is directly, Timms knows what is going on with the robbery of points and confirms it by saying "Behavioural Changes of assessors and claimants". He can only mean that assessors must give the correct amount of points and claimants need to stop over exaggerating their conditions. If assessors were to begin giving the correct amount of points, then and only then will claimants stop over exaggerating their conditions. And I am sure that also Citizens Advice will also stop advising people to over exaggerate their conditions.

      Clearly it was the DWP that caused people to over exaggerate their conditions in the first place because of the robbery of points.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @Whistleblower PIP assessor The system is rigged to 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @robbie Djsappointing from the Guardian.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @robbie The journalists in this country as a whole are lousy.  If they read the document, they would see that the figures are rounded to the nearest 50,000 and are essentially meaningless.  It reads as follows:

      It is estimated that there will be 50,000 fewer individuals in relative poverty after housing costs in FYE 2030 as a result of the modelled changes to social security, compared to baseline projections. This includes 50,000 children and 50,000 working age individuals.  Figures do not sum due to rounding. The impact on the number of pensioners in poverty rounds to zero.

      Utterly pointless and meaningless.  50,000 can't include 50,000 children AND 50,000 working age individuals.  It tells us absolutely nothing.  UNless you're a journalist who can't read.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @robbie The bill by 2029/30 causes about 754,000 new UC health claimants to be about £226.53 worse off a month than they would have been. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    Amendment Paper 7 July

    Helen Whately (pg 8)
    Clause 5, insert -
    A person’s eligibility for personal independence payment may only be determined following a face-to-face meeting between that person and a person acting on behalf of the Secretary of State.

    I had thought that Clause 5 was being removed?


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @HL I think the government's amendment removing clause 5 will pass because Labour have a working majority of 165 MPs and the rebel Labour MPs will support it along with the nodding dog loyal Labour MPs.

      While the Tory amendments will all fail because the Tories only have 120 MPs +4 Reform MPs if they support them. And their amendments will be opposed by Labour who have 403 MPs + all the other parties who will oppose the Tory amendments.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @HL Well the effect of this amendment would mean a 3 year wait for a new application!

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @John What makes you think the Clause 5 amendment will pass?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @godgivemestrength 😉
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @HL Look again.


      Page 4, line 22, leave out Clause 5
      Member's explanatory statement
      This amendment leaves out the personal independence payment clause. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @SickPerson Heartfelt authenticity, absolute pleasure to see, in Westminster 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    Im just about to migrate from ESA to Universal Credit, but ive not had a work capability assessment since before covid. Has anybody on here migrated & been asked to attend a work capability assessment or has it all gone through? I know this isn't the exact topic that your all talking about on here, but i wasn't sure where to put my question. What with everything that the governments been doing, Im just worrying that this would be another hurdle for me to claim it & it would help me enormously to know of other people's situations. Thanking you in advance.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Nutcracker Don't worry about the phantom down voter. This mysterious entity haunts the threads of the news section and manifests on even the most innocuous posts at random for no discernible reason. Alas, all attempts at communication with this tortured soul have thus far proved fruitless.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Nutcracker Thanks for the replies, that's helped alot with the worrying, although I can't understand why I got a vote for a down on my question. Anyway everyone is entitled to their opinion & im so glad that your all such here to help each other in these uncertain times. Bless you.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Nutcracker Migrating from ESA to UC does not trigger a Work Capability reassessment. Your LCW or LCWRA status is migrated from ESA to UC. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Nutcracker Hi l was transitioned from ESA to UC at the begining of June, and all went smoothly. wasn't required to do a work capability assessment, but I believe when my Adult Disability Payment is up for review a year in December..... I'll be required to have one.......good luck.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    I emailed my local Labour MP after last Tuesdays welfare bill reading fiasco, in my email I made it clear of what I thought of the Labour Welfare Bill I didn't hold back plus I question MPs behaviour during the debating of the bill (I was civil but direct) and I asked for her to kindly vote down the bill and the reasons why I thought she should take such action, that was last week... have I heard anything from her?....the tumble weed spins across the desolate road and the silence is deafening, so that's a clear F.Y from her to me and her disabled constituent's in my local area, I did find out afterwards that she voted for the bill last Tuesday, makes sense why she doesn't want to engage with me further, so I think my X will be going into a different box come the next elections. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    Labour’s not turning over any new leaves, it seems:

    With the wounds from the welfare bill fiasco still raw, there is a grim sense of a possible reprisal of the same story.

    There are whispers about families who currently have EHCPs being allowed to keep them, while in the future, kids with similar needs would be waved away, something that threatens a stereotypical two-tier model

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jul/07/disability-cuts-educational-rights-special-needs-children-parents
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @rtbcpart2 I agree that our governments are ineffectual and never take into account the knock on effects of their policies.

      Rich people should be paying more tax, nobody needs 1million per year as income and raising it slightly would mean a huge gain in income for the government. They say that 5% of the population currently pay 95% of all taxes and I always say it is because 5% of people hold most of the wealth which is immoral. There has been a drain on the wealth of the supposed middle classes and it certainly hasn't flowed downstream it is has gone to the already uber rich and something needs to change to fix a very broken system.

      There is no hope for working class people of which I am one, no hope to ever own my own home, it makes people feel as if they are on the fringes of their country with no way to make any headway or have autonomy and a home of their own.


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @LindsayLou @LindsayLou Your point is one often made and I get it, but there are supposed to be people in government who understand these things so they should know how to find a way, but all that ever happens is they keep trying to drain a dry well, mine an exhausted seam. It's not just immoral, it's ineffective.

      If ministers can't do the job they should give up their salaries, that would help. I could do their job easily as badly as they do, for the money, then they'd save on my welfare benefits and a few others', because I'd redistribute most of that money. Kick out the senior cabinet and allocate their salaries to disabled welfare claimants. Jobs created, welfare bill reduced. Already things are looking up.

      Seriously, what are most most mps actually doing? Those voting for welfare cuts aren't fulfilling even the basic requirement of their job, to represent their constituents.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @rtbcpart2 I am not against a wealth tax but an issue all countries face when raising taxes is the flight of millionaires from the country. Over 10,000 millionaires have already left the UK since Labour came to power. We then lose all taxes they were paying which actually ends up hurting us as there is less going into the pot. It is a delicate balance we need to strike or we end up worse off as a country and less money available for welfare.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @tintack Hilarious that they should identify those who might be subject to a wealth tax as rich (clue is in the word 'wealth'), then make like they shouldn't be taxed. Money needs to be found. Do we look where there is none, or do we look where there is lots? 🤔

      A "raid on the rich", and your problem is?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Gingin
      It's as though they're systematically going through every section of the electorate and doing whatever they can to alienate every single one. Apart from the "non-dom community" of course. When it comes to the super-rich the Rachelbot assures us the government is "listening to their concerns" because "they make a very good case".

      I see the Torygraph is fretting about a wealth tax, even though it's been ruled out (which, to be fair, probably means it will happen). They describe it as "a raid on the rich". Oddly, the Torygraph did not describe plans to plunge huge numbers of sick and disabled people into poverty as "a raid on the poor". Surely some mistake?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago
    Who are the main party spokespeople - on the bill?

    @James - would you be up for asking ChatGPT?

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @James Thank you!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @HL  GOVERNMENT (Labour)
      Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer
      Defending the bill as necessary to curb unsustainable welfare spending, though facing significant pushback even within his own party.
      thescottishsun.co.uk
      +15
      time.com
      +15
      news.sky.com
      +15
      ft.com
      +3
      irishnews.com
      +3
      standard.co.uk
      +3
      expressandstar.com
      +8
      apnews.com
      +8
      time.com
      +8

      Work & Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall
      Leading the bill's policy direction—setting out eligibility tightening for PIP, incapacity benefits, and the “Youth Guarantee” for 18–21 year olds. She has struggled to confirm total cost savings and has introduced concessions to appease Labour rebels.
      reddit.com
      +6
      lbc.co.uk
      +6
      en.wikipedia.org
      +6
      thetimes.co.uk
      +2
      en.wikipedia.org
      +2
      theguardian.com
      +2

      Minister for Social Security & Disability Sir Stephen Timms
      Defending the sustainability focus and clarifying that current claimants are protected, while emphasising future claimants would be subject to revised criteria.
      standard.co.uk
      +5
      lbc.co.uk
      +5
      lbc.co.uk
      +5

      Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner
      Has been a key negotiator with Labour backbenchers, promising that cuts won't betray party values while urging them to support the bill.
      thetimes.co.uk
      +15
      standard.co.uk
      +15
      nation.cymru
      +15

      🟨 OPPOSITION
      Conservatives
      Kemi Badenoch (Conservative leader in Commons)
      A vocal critic, describing the bill concessions as an “utter capitulation” and dismissing the legislation as “a total waste of time.”
      irishnews.com
      +1
      reddit.com
      +1
      thisisthecoast.co.uk

      Liberal Democrats
      Shadow Work & Pensions spokesperson Steve Darling MP (frontbench under Ed Davey)
      Responsible for the party’s official line on the bill, though less prominently featured in current coverage.
      en.wikipedia.org

      House of Lords
      Lord Kirkwood (Lib Dem welfare spokesperson in the Lords)
      Spoke during Lords debates, sharply criticised the bill for lacking ambition and being "laughing stock" compared with European standards.
      en.wikipedia.org
      +15
      bbc.co.uk
      +15
      ft.com
      +15

      🔍 Debate Highlights
      Labour tensions: Between ministers like Kendall and Timms, and MPs such as Stella Creasy and Vicky Foxcroft, there have been heated exchanges—especially over criteria thresholds for PIP eligibility.
      lbc.co.uk
      +5
      lbc.co.uk
      +5
      theguardian.com
      +5

      Rebellion pressure: Around 120–127 Labour MPs threatened to vote against the bill, triggering last-minute concessions from the government.
      ft.com
      +3
      nation.cymru
      +3
      thisisthecoast.co.uk
      +3

      Conservative backlash: Badenoch’s strong opposition highlights cross-party scepticism, signalling limited Tory cooperation.

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 days ago

    As usual this Labour Government just like the last Tory Government is using the right wing media/papers, ie Daily Mail etc, to stir up hatred against disabled benefit recipients.

    The Government always use these heinous methods when trying to get their horrendous welfare reforms through parliament.

    Just reinforces my personal view of this Labour Cabinet.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    Much though the government is trying to blame its failure to cut benefits for the disabled on the disabled (surprise!)and threatening 'trade-offs' in the form of raised taxes, I don't think that will wear with the general public. A passionate and widespread campaign against the cuts saw Starmer and his cabinet brought to the brink of defeat. Resorting to indiscriminate taxation will be them bringing about their own demise.

    As for not having the funds to lift the two child cap on the uc child element, they still haven't taken on board that giving families extra means tested benefits will have no impact on some claimants unless the extra is exempt from the benefit cap. They'd be giving with one hand and taking away with the other. They keep on making the same mistake - failing to understand the effect of adjusting one benefit on eligibility for another.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @James @James Yes, scrapped, because if someone qualifies by reason of overall circumstances, they qualify. They can't make do with less because their welfare benefits have reached some arbitrary threshold. They've already been means tested for assessable income so a benefit cap is a double means test.

      And yes, housing costs are the thing, totally out of proportion to almost everyone's income, however that income is derived. We also need a rise in the savings thresholds, which have been static for years, representing themselves, therefore, a cut in income, just like a frozen income tax threshold.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @keepingitreal The issue is that the benefit cap is not linked to inflation costs and should be scrapped or linked to housing costs
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @keepingitreal
      "As for not having the funds to lift the two child cap on the uc child element"

      In other words, we're going to use the failure to get the PIP cuts through as an excuse for why we can't do something else that we didn't want to do anyway. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    I thought today I would ask ChatGPT the following question

    "How are the disabled in the UK being treated?"

    This is the answer from ChatGPT

    Here’s a clear picture of how disabled people in the UK are being treated right now — it’s a mix of legal protections, serious challenges, growing advocacy, and widespread concern:

    ⚖️ 1. Benefits & Welfare Reform Under Fire
    New government welfare bill proposes tighter eligibility for disability benefits (PIP & UC), effective for new claimants from November 2026. Critics—including disability charities, UN experts, and many MPs—warn it risks pushing tens or even hundreds of thousands into poverty
    theguardian.com
    +15
    theguardian.com
    +15
    bigissue.com
    +15
    theguardian.com
    +11
    time.com
    +11
    thescottishsun.co.uk
    +11
    .

    A Labour rebellion resulted in some concessions: current PIP recipients are protected, and new assessments delayed until after a review in late 2026
    thetimes.co.uk
    +1
    thescottishsun.co.uk
    +1
    .

    However, charities like Scope warn the "disability price‑tag" will increase by nearly 12% over five years — about £14,688 extra annually — with benefits covering less than half those costs by 2029–30
    ft.com
    +2
    theguardian.com
    +2
    ft.com
    +2
    .

    The UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has also criticized the UK’s benefits system for being punitive and retraumatising
    theguardian.com
    +9
    bigissue.com
    +9
    gov.uk
    +9
    .

    👎 2. Everyday Discrimination & Work Barriers
    Almost 39% of disabled workers in the UK report bullying, harassment, or discrimination at work over the past five years. This includes insensitive questioning, offensive jokes, and feeling pushed to leave roles
    facilitatemagazine.com
    +1
    disabilitysheffield.org.uk
    +1
    .

    A separate TUC survey found that 34% of disabled workers don’t receive legally required “reasonable adjustments,” and 28% face bullying. The Employment Rights Bill 2025 aims to introduce stronger protections
    facilitatemagazine.com
    +2
    tuc.org.uk
    +2
    disabilitysheffield.org.uk
    +2
    .

    Graduates with disabilities are finding it very hard to secure jobs—often submitting 60% more applications and receiving noticeably less interview invites—despite legal rights under the Equality Act 2010
    reddit.com
    +4
    ft.com
    +4
    thetimes.co.uk
    +4
    .

    🚍 3. Accessibility & Public Services
    A Transport Committee report concluded that up to two-thirds of disabled travelers encounter serious problems “always or most of the time” on public transport—ranging from plane delays with wheelchairs to taxis refusing assistance dogs
    committees.parliament.uk
    +1
    publications.parliament.uk
    +1
    . MPs warned these failures amount to treating disabled people as “second-class citizens.”

    The UK’s Disability Action Plan outlines many positive ambitions—improving public services, infrastructure, communications, and adherence to the UN Convention—but advocates warn implementation must accelerate
    theguardian.com
    +3
    committees.parliament.uk
    +3
    theguardian.com
    +3
    gov.uk
    .

    🎙️ 4. Community Voices & Protest
    Online and on the streets, disabled people are speaking out loudly:

    “It’s so upsetting seeing people… say ‘You just don’t want to work’… ableism and outright hatred hurts more than any of it.”
    reddit.com

    “The new criteria… could get 12 points with 2 points in 6 elements but you wouldn’t be entitled… We’re considered life unworthy of life.”
    reddit.com

    Activist group Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) organised widespread protests under the hashtag #WelfareNotWarfare earlier this year
    en.wikipedia.org
    +1
    dpac.uk.net
    +1
    .

    ✅ 5. Legal Protections & Government Strategy
    Equality Act 2010 mandates “reasonable adjustments” in workplaces and public services, including transport
    theguardian.com
    +15
    scope.org.uk
    +15
    disabilitysheffield.org.uk
    +15
    .

    The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is formally investigating whether DWP disability assessments have unlawfully discriminated or contributed to deaths among claimants
    theguardian.com
    +1
    bigissue.com
    +1
    .

    The Disability Action Plan aims for more inclusive policymaking, better data, and new funding to support disabled rights—but much depends on its rollout and follow-through
    gov.uk
    .

    🟡 Summary & Outlook
    Legal foundations: Strong in theory, but implementation lags. Disabled people often face systemic barriers in welfare, work, travel, and everyday services.

    Policy shifts: Welfare reforms continue to generate intense backlash from MPs, charities, and the UN. Benefits are being protected for existing recipients—at least for now—but future eligibility remains uncertain.

    Hybrid picture: While ambition in government strategy exists, disabled communities continue to face discrimination, poverty, and inaccessibility.

    Key indicators to watch: EHRC inquiry outcomes, welfare bill's final passage, the 2026 PIP review, and progress on the Action Plan.


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    Starmer now pitching 2 child cap benefit against disabled people, unbelievable. The immorality of Labour is astonishing.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Radionoush The Magna Carta was written for a reason. It seems that with the likes of Labour and the Conservatives, a Magna Carta 2.0 is needed. Labour and Conservatives are beginning to act in the same way as king John. It seems that Reform will also act in the same way that Labour and the Conservatives have been acting recently. Time for these other parties to have a chance I reckon.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @JHF Yeah, also a lot of talk this morning on the radio using SEN in the same way ie pitching one group in need against others.  To use children to try to win a political battle against people with disabilities is just beyond the pale.  Are there no depths to which this govt will not stoop?  A Labour govt. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 days ago
    My last post got cut!

    Oral Evidence sessions
    Some public bill committees begin by inviting ministers or other officials to talk to them in person about the bill. They may also invite lobby groups, organisations or individuals with a particular interest in the subject to give their views in this way. If you think you or your organisation should be invited, you can contact the departmental officials responsible for the bill.

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact
We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.