Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants in Wales are asking for support after the only in-person consultation in the country was cancelled and will not be replaced.

Wales will be particularly hard hit by the Green Paper.  Research by Policy in Practice found that around 190,000 people in Wales are expected to be affected by the reforms, equating to 6.1% of the population.

The Guardian reports that 27% of Wales’ population, live with a disability – higher than the UK average of 22% – and 11% of working-age people, compared with 7% in England.

Yet the DWP refused a request by Wales’ first minister, Eluned Morgan, conduct a Wales-specific impact assessment.

And only one in-person consultation meeting was arranged for the whole of Wales, in Cardiff on 3 June.

But, less than two days after the inaccessible venue was announced, and with only one working day left, the event was cancelled.  The DWP claim that this was because the venue they had booked had pulled out at the last minute.

In place of the consultation, the DWP said they would set up an online event instead.

However, a protest still took place on the day, which was covered by ITV.

And now Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) Cymru has written an open letter to Keir Starmer demanding that:

“There must be no vote in the House of Commons on disability cuts until a full and genuine public consultation has been carried out in Wales.

“Given the government’s complete failure to listen to disabled people, and the DWP’s demonstrated inability to arrange a genuine consultation, any consultation must be run independently by Welsh disabled people’s organisations, also inviting the views of carers. The DWP must attend as observers.”

They are asking for supporters to sign the open letter and also to sign a petition calling for the cuts to be abandoned.

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.
    · 39 minutes ago
    On Richard Burgon’s Facebook page there was an online conference last night about the benefits cuts. I don’t know how to post the video here. It is on his Facebook page if people want to catch up with it. It was really inspiring and uplifting. People are fighting for the disabled. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 12 hours ago
    I repost this here too as this seems to be where the most up to date convo is

    From Dan bloom on twitter:

    “NEW: Details on PIP/UC disability benefit cuts ✂️
    I hear a bill could be introduced next week, suggesting "second reading" vote is in the week of June 30 or later
    It's likely to be tightly focused on the cuts, while other welfare reforms will come only later in the year.
    This will concentrate Labour MPs’ anger, but could also allow the government to classify it as a “money bill” — meaning it would be made law within a month of being sent to the House of Lords even if peers still object.
    Officials have also held talks about putting the bill through a “committee of the whole house,” preventing lengthy evidence sessions with experts and campaigners. One insider argued: “You rip the plaster off, otherwise it just drags out for longer.”


    So what does this tell us?

    I think labour ministers either think the standard legislation route and getting a standard bill type through would be too close for comfort or they’d lose

    To fast track the bill (by making it a money bill) is the labour ministers playing dirty and cheating in a way and suggests they don’t think they can ‘win’ in this gov vs disabled ‘battle’ playing out ‘fair & square’ (something to half smirk about)

    But if it does become a money bill it speaks huge volumes as gov reasoning for welfare cuts and reforms being driven primarily to help disabled into employment officially blows up and become total bull

    I hope the gov using these lowbrow tactics finally opens a real legit legal route to challenge all this in court

    Labour higher ups can’t be allowed to get alway with this by ‘fixing the deck’
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 56 minutes ago
      @SLB It’s all absurd. And just seems a face saving government farce at this point.  It won’t save money. It won’t put people back in work. Unemployment figures are increasing by the day.  Labour will increase unemployment, poverty and social unrest.  All for headline cuts in media.  


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 hours ago
      @D I also don’t know if anyone else noticed this from the politico article.

      It sounds like the gov wants to just focus on the pip cuts (4 point rule) rushed through on this legislation 

      However a paragraph or so down it mentions releasing another bill later in the year to deal with the rest of the welfare reform ideas

      It also mentions some Labour figures want to concentrate mp and public anger with the legislation due this month.

      Other pieces of info to remember is timms is currently in charge of pip assessment reforms (where he could overwrite current activities and the point descriptors). We can tell from media articles that top of the list pip claimant targets are first those with mental health issue, followed by neurodivergents (esp autistic & adhd) - the 4pt rule is projected to only affect 48% of those with mental health, 19% of adhd and 6% of autistic claimants - as someone on the spectrum I would bet a lot of money that timms pip assessments rewrite will limit descriptors that affect us.

      I’m wondering if labour higher ups know there’s a chance the initial 4pt rule could be defected in commons and court and want to contain anger to this initial bill and everyone focused on that so they lower defences and don’t really noticed welfare cuts part 2 bill launched in autumn/winter 2025

      The 4pt rule is only the govs first shot at cutting disability benefits - Stephen timms has shown himself to be a nasty piece of work in the last month and honestly I fear his pip assessment reforms could make the impact of the 4pt rule look like a drop in the ocean in comparison)

      I think the disabiled community will need to keep up the fight and pressure well into 2026 minimum 

      This battle is likely to be decided on ‘endurance’ and not being the side who ‘blinks first’
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 hours ago
      @SLB SLB, thanks for your post. I’ve been wound up about this issue and will sleep better tonight having read this. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 hours ago
      @SLB That’s very interesting

      So ironically the speaker cannot stay impartial in this situation.

      Sounds like the gov may put Lindsay Hoyle in a position where he’s guaranteed to upset one side

      Who does he fear more - Labour higher ups or angry disabled community (I imagine the MPs as they are able to knock on his office door and we can’t)

      To those that are emailing round political figures I strongly suggest ppl reading these benefits&work news topics start emailing Lindsay Hoyle as it seems like he’s become a pivotal figure on what may happen next
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 hours ago
      @D Thanks for the heads up on the X post.  However, it's not up to the govt to decide whether something is a money bill.  That's up to the speaker to decide - and my guess is that he will be sympathetic to our cause.  On my limited knowledge of such things, I didn't think it could be a money bill because it deals with eligibility and changes to the system rather than just cuts to the department. UNLESS, they want to put through the £5bn of cuts as a money bill and then deal with HOW they make those saving further down the road (ie. eligibility changes).  In which case, we're no further forward.  

      I'm not a fan of AI, but I checked to see what that had to say.  Here's what it said when I asked for examples on money bills:

      Budget Bills – These are annual bills that outline the government's plans for taxation and public spending for the upcoming financial year.

      Taxation Bills – Bills that introduce or amend taxes, such as income tax, VAT, or corporation tax.

      Public Expenditure Bills – Bills that allocate funds for government departments and public services, like healthcare, education, or defense.

      Customs and Excise Bills – Bills related to tariffs, duties, and other customs-related financial matters.

      So, the actual financial cuts to the department would probably count.   Then I asked:  "The govt are proposing to change the eligibility criteria for Personal Independence Payment so that each claimant must score 4 points in one answer in order to get the benefit. Will this change be classed as a money bill?"

      The answer was:

      Based on what you've described, the proposed change to the eligibility criteria for PIP—specifically requiring claimants to score 4 points in one answer—appears to be a social or welfare policy change rather than a direct financial or budgetary measure.

      Typically, a money bill in the UK Parliament is one that solely concerns national taxation or public expenditure. Since this change relates to the criteria for eligibility rather than the allocation of funds or taxation, it is unlikely to be classified as a money bill.

      However, if the change results in a significant reduction or increase in government expenditure on benefits, it could have financial implications, but the legislation itself would usually be considered a social welfare or policy bill rather than a money bill.

      In summary, unless the change directly involves the appropriation of funds or taxation, it probably wouldn't be classified as a money bill. 


      That pretty much ties in with what I read a month or two back when this issue raised its head then.   So, my guess is that any "money bill" would be a vote to change the amount of funding in DWP, but not the eligibility.  So, perhaps that's what Dan Bloom means when he says it will be "tightly focussed on cuts while other welfare reforms would come later in the year?"  I think we all know that the DWP budget is going to be cut by £5bn.  The issue is how they do it.

      One of the things I find bizarre in this saga is that they want to cut money for those who can't work - but raise it for able-bodied people who can.   It's like everything is topsy-turvy.  Surely if there are healthy people out there who aren't working, it should be THEM that the govt is concentrating on getting back to work?  It feels like an absurd Kafka novel.




  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 14 hours ago
    DPAC letter to Timms:-


    Letter to Stephen Timms: urgent concerns over disability cuts consultation failures

    Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) has today written to Stephen Timms, the Minister of State for Social Security and Disability, to raise our serious concerns with the quality and fairness of the so-called “consultation” being carried out on disability benefit cuts.We are asking for the consultation to be extended, and for urgent action to address the failings.We urge the government start again on welfare reform, listening to disabled people and carers in a genuine process of co-production.This is what we said in our letter:

        Dear Stephen Timms,

        I am writing to you on behalf of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) to urgently raise concerns regarding the accessibility of the consultation on the benefits cuts proposed in the March 2025 Green Paper. In light of the limited time available for the consultation which is due to close on 30 June 2025, you are asked to take urgent action to address our concerns, confirm what steps are being taken and to extend the time available for disabled people to engage with the consultation given the accessibility issues they have faced to date. In order for the consultation to fulfil its purpose. Disabled people who are likely to be affected by proposed benefits changes, must have a proper and meaningful opportunity to engage with the consultation and accessible arrangements must therefore be urgently made to facilitate their proper participation in the consultation.

        Our concerns

        The face-to-face consultation in Cardiff on the 3rd June was cancelled less than two days after the venue was announced, with only one working day left before the event.

        The DWP has claimed that the Cardiff venue cancelled the meeting at the last minute yet the venue itself was already inaccessible to disabled people. No transport to the venue was offered by the DWP for those who wanted to take part.

        The booked venue was only revealed at the last minute. This was despite disabled people asking multiple times, over weeks, for information so that they could plan journeys, accommodation, and access requirements. The venue was far out of the centre of Cardiff, and completely inaccessible for many disabled people, especially at such short notice. It would have meant a wheelchair user travelling 1.6 miles unassisted. Shockingly this was the only face-to-face consultation event for the whole of Wales.

        People at other DWP consultations in England have had similarly poor experiences. For example, lack of accessibility of the venue led to only 9 out of 15 people managing to attend the in-person consultation event in the South West.

        The in-person consultations did not cover the North of England – Carlisle and Newcastle were completely missed out. For Wales, the North and South are poorly connected so any meaningful consultation would require not just an event in the South but another in the North.

        In Northern Ireland no face-to-face consultations appear to be taking place at all and the date of the online consultation was only announced last week.

        We have also received concerning feedback about the online consultations and the understanding of those conducting the meeting. One attendee reported:

        It was also clear that not all participants fully understood the consultation questions or their implications, particularly those without background knowledge of the benefits system. This raises significant concerns about the quality and reliability of the feedback being gathered. At one point, the facilitator was unable to explain New Style ESA or JSA, and I had to step in to clarify how these benefits work, especially for those who do not qualify for income-related support. It was concerning to witness such a knowledge gap from someone facilitating a consultation on welfare reform.

        Although we were told that all feedback would be recorded — even on topics not officially included in the consultation — it is unclear how that information will be used or whether it will influence policy development in any meaningful way.

        The impact of the failure to make arrangements for accessible and meaningful consultation meetings

        Only having online consultations and/or not having sufficient and/or accessible face-to-face consultations is unacceptable because, as I’m sure you’re aware, at least one-third of disabled people do not have access to the internet or the skills needed to take part in an online meeting. This obviously means that many people who will be most affected by the Government’s planned cuts to social security payments will be totally excluded from taking part in any consultation events.

        We are concerned that the consultation not only doesn’t deal with many of the policies that are most likely to affect disabled people (as it only deals with 12 out of 22 policies) but fails to properly engage disabled people on those limited topics. We are also concerned that full impact assessments which would inform engagement with the consultation are not available and will not be made available during the course of the consultation.

        The whole process to date seems inaccessible, chaotic and incomplete and given how few people are being consulted, both virtually and in person, we are extremely concerned about how representative this process is and whether it meets even the most basic standards of engagement with disabled people and their advocates.

        Furthermore it is DPAC’s view that the whole process is flawed and is non-compliant with Articles 4 (3) and 33.3 of the UN CRPD and General Comment 7.  It also violates the Gunning Principles and the requirements to make reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act and is therefore potentially unlawful.  The only meaningful remedy is to withdraw the proposals and meaningfully engage with disabled people and our representative organisations to ensure all government proposals are compliant with the UN CRPD and equality legislation and ensure progressive realisation of the articles as well as compliance with equality duties.  Failure to address these flaws may result in legal action and sanction from the disability committee of the UN.

        It is essential that the government start again on welfare reform, listening to disabled people and carers in a genuine process of co-production.

        In light of the concerns outlined above and the limited time available, we invite you within 7 days i.e.  by June 16th to confirm:

        1.     What steps are being taken to ensure that online and in-person consultation events are accessible and available to affected disabled people across all relevant regions. This should include ensuring accessible venues, across a range of regions as well as adequate notice to allow for attendance arrangements to be made.;

        2.     That the time for engagement with the consultation will be extended by at least 4 weeks, to reflect the delays in making accessible arrangements and allow meaningful engagement with disabled people.

        We look forward to your response by June 16th.

         

        Linda Burnip

        On behalf of the DPAC steering group

        c.c. Debbie Abrahams, Chair of the Work and Pensions Select Committee,

        Katie Farrington, Director General Social Security, Disability and Pensions

        Helga Swindenbank, Head of Disability Services
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 14 hours ago
    Dear Sarah,

    Thanks for your reply. Yes, i’ve corresponded with her several times, and spoken with Sir Ed Davey who raised our family’s situation at PMQs a couple of weeks ago. I felt it important that local councils were aware that these reforms are likely to have a serious effect on council funds in future, so the issues can be raised at whatever forum/with whoever councillors might feel appropriate.

    Kind regards,

    G**

    On 10 Jun 2025, at 18:36, Sarah Warren (Cllr) <Sarah_Warren@Bathnes.gov.uk> wrote:

    Dear G** - this is all very concerning. Have you written to your MP Anna Sabine direct?

    Best regards

    Sarah

    Sarah Warren
    Liberal Democrat Councillor for Bathavon North Ward
    Deputy Leader, Cabinet Lead for Sustainable B&NES
    Bath and North East Somerset Council, Lewis House, Manvers St, Bath. BA1 1JG
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 12 hours ago
      @gingin Well at least she replied. It would be nice if she followed it up with some action. Maybe she's just in shock!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 hours ago
    Just gotta hope this means Welsh Labour will vote as one against the cuts.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 hours ago
      @robbie I can see in some parts where they're coming from. I personally find it infuriating that we've had consistent outcry and inquiries and what have you over WFA being cut and this has resulted in some backtracking from the government.

      There's been absolutely none of that for benefit cuts and I'll be shocked if they backtrack to even remotely the same extent as the WFA.

      And yet we're talking apples to oranges here. There has been more uproar about pensioners losing out on 300 quid max on top of whatever other money they have and yet PIP - which is a lifeline for a lot of us, including said pensioners - is what's being called 'pocket money' and what is being quietly accepted by the British public.

      We've also seen report after report published on this website that strongly indicates that we will suffer tremendously if these proposals go ahead and the government's persistent response has been to shift the onus of responsibility onto us and repeatedly say 'well, if they got off their lazy behinds and got a job, they won't have to worry, will they?'.

      And because we've already been painted as scroungers who simply don't want to work for years, the public just eats that up. Because a lot of them would rather no help gets to us at all than the possibility that their taxpayer money makes it to a quote unquote fraudster.

      So, yep, I do feel this person is right when referencing the barn door being closed after the horse has bolted. The public sentiment was already against us before this government poisoned the well even more with falsehoods regarding how much exactly benefits - and, by extension, benefit fraud - costs the economy and any outrage from MPs has fallen on deaf ears. Mainly due to them not challenging Strarmer, Kendall and co. in the right manner (i.e. I'll certainly pop a bottle of champagne when at least one MP or reporter or journalist points out to their face that PIP is not an out-of-work benefit) and mainly because they don't care about what they deem 'tales of woe' from constituents.

      What we currently have is a great start but that's just it. It's a start. Nothing more. While I try and remain hopeful myself that these proposals will get voted down, I completely understand the hopelessness of others given the general reaction I've read from the public on outlets such as Reddit and comments on certain newspapers. And it appears the government shares the same view and desires to kick us in the face in whatever way they can.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @robbie Just wow. Those rebel MPs have only just woken up to this? What planet, indeed. They've been doing their utmost since the proposals were announced,. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 15 hours ago
    I've emailed 58 local councillors individually, as guided by B&W in a separate thread. Going cross-eyed now. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 hours ago
      @gingin @gingin Rest, you've done so much. Don't burn yourself out. We are grateful for all so many of you have done on here. Thank you, thank you all. X
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 hours ago
    Ed Davey talks on ITV’s Good Morning (after the 47 min mark) about unpaid family carers and how if they decided to stop this work, the burden would fall on the state. Given what he’s saying publicly about caters, I can’t see how the Lib Dems could do anything other to an oppose the welfare proposals, especially around the issue of the link to Carer’s Allowance. I hope they shout about it once the legislation is published
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 hours ago
    Sorry, me again:

    'the last year has become a cautionary tale: ministers elected to repudiate Tory austerity are now seen to be replicating it – and voters have noticed, with Labour’s poll numbers sliding as a result.'

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/09/the-guardian-view-on-labours-tough-choices-they-are-costing-the-government-dearly
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 11 hours ago
      @gingin Read all you posts gingin.  They are very informative.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 hours ago
      @gingin The usual tough love rhetoric 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 hours ago
    Oh dear Eddie my luv, do you really want to strap yourself to this embarrassing news story? When the decision to cut the WFA has actually resulted in increasing government expenditure on pension credit?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c79e0qq3r31o
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 hours ago


    **Version 4 – Countdown to the June vote (updated June 10th)**

    This is not just a list—it’s a movement.  

    As the clock ticks down to a crucial vote that could strip vital support from hundreds of thousands of disabled people, a powerful coalition has formed. From disability campaigners and unions to charities, faith leaders, public figures, and MPs—voices from every corner of society are uniting to say: enough is enough.  

    With time running out, the question is urgent: when will decision-makers truly hear the depth and breadth of this outcry?

    Together, we refuse to let the rights and dignity of sick and disabled people be dismantled.  
    Every name here stands as a testament to courage and solidarity.  
    Share this list. Amplify these voices.  
    Because history will remember who stood up—and who stayed silent—when disabled people needed us most.

    ---

    **Disability and Advocacy Organisations**  
    Scope, Disability Rights UK, Inclusion London, Inclusion Barnet, Disability Sheffield, Community Integrated Care, NSUN, WinVisible, Crips Against Cuts, Disability Benefits Consortium, Mencap, Sense, RNIB, RNID, National Autistic Society, Leonard Cheshire, Business Disability Forum, Disability Positive, VoiceAbility, VODG (Voluntary Organisations Disability Group), Stay Safe East, Three Guineas Trust, Fightback4Justice, Benefits and Work, Disability News Service, Action on Disability (AoD), POhWER, Disability Can Do, ME Association, Action for M.E., #MEAction UK, 25% ME Group, MS Society UK, MS Trust, Rethink Mental Illness, Well Adapt, DPO Forum England, Black Triangle Campaign

    **Charities Supporting Marginalised Groups**  
    Age UK, Independent Age (older people)  
    Contact, Council for Disabled Children (families with disabled children)  
    METRO Charity (intersectional/LGBTQ+ and disability)

    **Homelessness and Poverty Charities (joint letter to Liz Kendall)**  
    St Mungo’s, Crisis, Shelter, YMCA, Homeless Link, Centrepoint, The Passage, Thames Reach, Depaul UK, Single Homeless Project, Justlife, Hope Housing, The Connection at St Martin’s, Groundswell, Turn2us, Joseph Rowntree Foundation

    **Food Poverty and Anti-Poverty Networks**  
    The Trussell Trust, Independent Food Aid Network (IFAN)

    **Faith-Based Organisations**  
    Church of England (Archbishop of York, Bishop of Leicester), Together for the Church of England, Quakers in Britain

    **Advocacy and Rights Groups**  
    Citizens Advice SORT Group, Minority Rights Group, Campaign for Disability Justice, Carers UK, Carers Trust, Coalition Against Benefit Cuts, Money and Mental Health Policy Institute, Trust for London, Liberty, Justice, Amnesty International

    **Trade Unions**  
    PCS, Unite Community, BFAWU, TUC (publicly endorsed the #TakingThePIP campaign at the June 2025 Disabled Workers’ Conference), Scottish TUC, Equity (moved the emergency motion against the cuts and mobilised its members to campaign), Musicians' Union (seconded the motion backing #TakingThePIP), National Union of Journalists (NUJ), Cardiff Trades Union Council, Trade Union Coordinating Group (TUCG), University and College Union (UCU)

    **Disabled People’s Campaigns and Activists**  
    DPAC (Disabled People Against Cuts), Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People (GMCDP), #TakingThePIP campaign, Elaine Clifford, John Pring, Michelle Cardno (Fightback4Justice), Steve Donnison, Holiday Whitehead (Benefits and Work), Joy Dove, John McArdle (co-founder, Black Triangle), Samuel Miller (advocate and disability justice campaigner)

    **Public Figures**  
    Liz Carr, Rosie Jones, Ruth Madeley, James Taylor (Scope), Martin Lewis (MoneySavingExpert), Cherylee Houston, Kim Tserkezie, Daniel Monks, Jack Hunter, Neil Duncan-Jordan, and others

    **Arts and Cultural Institutions**  
    National Theatre, Graeae Theatre Company, Equity, Disability Arts Online, Disability Arts Cymru, University of Atypical for Arts and Disability, Disability Arts International (DAI), Arts & Disability Ireland

    **House of Lords Advocates**  
    Baroness Grey-Thompson (Crossbench), Lord Addington (Liberal Democrat), Lord Holmes of Richmond (Conservative), Baroness Sherlock (Labour), Lord Shinkwin (Conservative), Lord Touhig (Labour)

    **Journalists and Media**  
    Frances Ryan (The Guardian), May Bulman (The Independent), Disability News Service (led by John Pring), The Canary, Novara Media, Prospect Magazine, LabourList, The Guardian, The Independent, ITV News

    **International and Human Rights Organisations**  
    UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) – Previously found “grave and systematic violations” of disabled people’s rights in the UK due to austerity and welfare reform since 2010  
    UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) – Called for “corrective measures” to address welfare changes harming disabled people — though not yet specifically referencing the 2025 PIP proposals  
    Amnesty International – Condemned welfare changes affecting disabled people as human rights violations

    **Parliamentary and Political Opposition**  
    Over 170 Labour MPs, Diane Abbott, Andy Burnham, Sadiq Khan, Rachael Maskell, Steve Witherden, Ros Jones, Leeds West and Pudsey CLP, Debbie Abrahams MP

    **Parliamentary Groups**  
    All-Party Parliamentary Group on Disability (Chair: Marsha de Cordova MP)

    **Legal Support and Advice Services**  
    Disability Law Service (DLS), Public Law Project (PLP), Leigh Day, Bhatt Murphy, Aoife O’Reilly (solicitor), Tom Royston (barrister), Liberty, Justice

    **42 Labour MPs Who Signed the Opposition Letter**  
    Diane Abbott, Paula Barker, Lee Barron, Lorraine Beavers, Apsana Begum, Olivia Blake, Richard Burgon, Dawn Butler, Ian Byrne, Stella Creasy, Neil Duncan-Jordan, Cat Eccles, Barry Gardiner, Mary Glindon, Sarah Hall, Chris Hinchliff, Imran Hussain, Terry Jermy, Kim Johnson, Mary Kelly Foy, Peter Lamb, Ian Lavery, Brian Leishman, Emma Lewell, Clive Lewis, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Rachael Maskell, Andy McDonald, John McDonnell, Abtisam Mohamed, Grahame Morris, Charlotte Nichols, Simon Opher, Kate Osborne, Richard Quigley, Andrew Ranger, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Zarah Sultana, Jon Trickett, Chris Webb, Nadia Whittome, Steve Witherden

    ---

    **Public Opinion Speaks:**  
    The vast majority of people in the UK do not support cutting disability benefits. Polls show most believe these reforms are about saving money, not helping people into work—and that they risk pushing more disabled people into poverty. When it comes to supporting those who need it most, the public is clear: enough is enough.  
    (Sources: More in Common, Community Care, Ipsos)



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 13 hours ago
      @CaroA Yes it’s funny how much the winter fuel thing has dominated the news but this still gets no real front and centre in your face coverage. 

      It’s a disgrace. The winter fuel payment is one payment. Yes it helps many. But the proposed cuts to the disabled is far more serious. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 hours ago
      @CaroA Starmers & his cronies are not interested in our well being.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 hours ago
      @CaroA Shared, thanks so much Carol
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 hours ago
    If I put on my "tinfoil hat" I would say that no dissent will be acknowledged by Timms, Starmer, Kendall or Reeves, they have been told to possibly by the Tony Blair Institute or donors to ignore any backlash and just push it through regardless. 

    The positive spin on this is that Unions are against this, to my knowledge many high profile Unions support Labour, many MP's support us and won't go silently into the night, DPAC do take notice and they do care.

    Even if this passes the very fact no impact assessment has been given will stick out like a sore thumb, this saga will continue regardless of it passes or not, I fear that many people will lose hope if this were to pass but don't, you're not invisible, you're not alone on this. One thing I've noticed even when I felt low is that there is a community, it isn't about virtue signalling, people do care.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 14 hours ago
      @Dave Dee No leader in my lifespan has ever stated that his/her policy was unpopular and like all of them they never thought they would lose their positions since they would be the last to know that as a result of believing their own propaganda and of course those around them always keep saying otherwise until their fall is inevitable. I have not seen one leader to behave in any way they would take responsibilities for their own actions. They all act like tyrants when in power
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 hours ago
    Just had my telephone PIP assessment my nerves are shot the question we're non stop and I had to stop three times just to take a breather. Now is the waiting.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 8 hours ago
      @Sue Good luck @Sue!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 hours ago
    Open letter and petition signed. ITV did a good job here, but shame they missed the first speaker whose message was so powerful. I guess it was a bit long to include in a short report. 

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.