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.
    · 5 hours ago
    DPAC's letter to Sir Stephen Timms re consultations. 

    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.
    · 6 hours ago
    Interview with Reeves in the Guardian today, 12/6/25, stating she won't back down on cuts to disability benefits but admits there may be tweaks.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 6 hours ago
    They insist on stating that claims for pip are up by the thousands, they fail to tell the gullable public that out of those thousands of claims very few are actually given an award .

    The ful truth in all this will never come to light.  All we can do is keep fighting and thankfully we do have some decent MPs and organisations willing to stand up and fight with us.

    I am waiting further responses from my MP and local councillor.





  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 8 hours ago
    Not sure if anyone has posted this in the comments:

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 hours ago
      @Joey Thanks Joey, my husband sent this our MP already
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 9 hours ago
    https://www.indcatholicnews.com/news/52578

    'As they ponder their decision, perhaps they could consider the truth of what Pope Francis wrote in 2013:

    "Just as the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" sets a clear limit in order to safeguard the value of human life, today we also have to say "thou shalt not" to an economy of exclusion and inequality. Such an economy kills." '
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 9 hours ago
    From Narcissism to Psychopathy: When Refusing to Back Down Reveals a More Disturbing Diagnosis

    Yesterday, Liz Kendall doubled down in her response to Debbie Abrahams, dismissing mounting warnings from MPs, charities, and disabled people themselves—insisting the government would push ahead with the vote to cut PIP and the Universal Credit health element.

    In a previous post, I reflected on the narcissistic traits of this government—its gaslighting language, its obsession with control, and its inability to acknowledge harm. But with this latest move, something even darker is surfacing.

    When does this go beyond narcissism? When does it start to resemble something far more chilling—like psychopathy?

    Because what kind of leadership:

    Ignores mass distress and repeated warnings?

    Pushes ahead with life-altering cuts with no proper public consultation?

    Frames basic support for disabled people as a "perverse incentive"?

    Prioritises £5 billion in savings over human survival?


    When a government knowingly chooses policies that will increase poverty for hundreds of thousands, lead to widespread relapse, and contribute to many suicides—even when untold harm will be the consequence—we are no longer talking about misguided priorities. We are talking about a deliberate refusal to care.

    That refusal to pause, to consult, or to show mercy isn’t just authoritarian. It mirrors traits long associated with institutional psychopathy: lack of empathy, disregard for consequences, and the rationalisation of harm.

    This is what happens when a government turns away from compassion and governs instead through cold calculation—whatever the human cost.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 3 hours ago
      @CaroA Comes from the very top and filters down..
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 6 hours ago
      @CaroA Inspirational post, so astutely conceived.

      And I would further argue that their perception of us as a scourge to be eradicated is psychotic in its lethal delusion. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 hours ago
      @CaroA Brilliantly put. I think this should be shared .
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 8 hours ago
      @CaroA I wonder if we put in a complaint to the Labour Party if they would respond or even care? Your words are very true and it’s very worrying the lack of care they have.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 hours ago
      @CaroA None of this would have happened if Labour had just scraped in last July (say a majority of less than 30).  What will change their mind, eventually, is the realisation that the costs associated with increased poverty, ill health etc will far outweigh the savings they originally sought,. To paraphrase Bill Clinton: 'it's the money, stupid'.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 18 hours ago
    Dear Pathways to Poverty Team,

    I hear you’re giving out Samaritans leaflets at your events. I think I can find one online, so it’s perhaps not worth my trouble to arrange my travel (for the second time) to attend your pre-decided smoke-and-mirrors event.

    If you can’t actually listen to the voices of disabled people and their carers, you’re at least trying to be seen to be doing so, right?

    Kind regards,

    G***

    On 11 Jun 2025, at 17:43, DWP Events Pathways to work <events.pathwaystowork@dwp.gov.uk> wrote:


    Dear all

    Following our previous email, we have now worked closely with the Welsh government to rearrange the cancelled 3 June Cardiff public Pathways to Work consultation event.

    We are pleased to offer you a priority space on this new in person event, which will take place from 1-4pm on Monday 23 June, at the following location
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 hours ago
    John McDonnell said on Politics Hub on Sky News tonight that he "predicts backbenchers will be forcing a rethink in the coming weeks" about the benefit cuts, with Sky News adding "despite the work and pensions secretary today insisting she will be going through with the controversial changes."

    I'm not sure I have much faith in John McDonnell, but he probably does have a good pulse on what backbenchers are thinking and planning. 

    Interestingly, Sky News is also reporting that the Lords have blocked the government's Data Bill, despite it being passed by the Commons.  Nothing to do with benefits, of course, but it's interesting that in recent years the Lords have been keeping the govt in check.

    Also on the Sky News website, I can't see anything about benefits on their rather generously-sized copies of tomorrow's front pages.  Probably not surprising given that the spending review is making the headlines. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 hours ago
    Even The Guardian is putting the boot into Labour: read John Grace's political sketch.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 21 hours ago
    I'm simmering with fury right now. Just responded to a Labour councillor's email. Its hard to read the platitudes. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 22 hours ago
    There was mention here yesterday of an x post where it was thought the Commons bill would be voted on as early as next week, but no sign of it in commons business as yet. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 hours ago
      @john To be honest, a load of them abstaining might not be so bad now the Tories are planning to vote against, as long as hefty amount of other Labour MPs vote against, too.   

      Ironically, there is a debate in Westminster Hall on 17th about "government support for disabled people in poverty!"
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 hours ago
      @Slb It has gone from May, to the beginning of June to by the end of June. As they try to "convince" their MPs not to revolt. Sadly I think they will be successful as most MPs seem only concerned about how it might impact their chances of re-election. So can be bribed by other policies or spending or convinced the policy is popular with the general public or the spiel about the most severely disabled who are genuinely unable to work being not affected. Or convinced to abstain rather than vote against, so they can simultaneously tell unhappy constituents they did not support it while also keeping on the good side of the Labour leadership.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 22 hours ago
    Sky News have highlighted Kendall's response to the Work and Pensions Committee. 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 hours ago
    The irony is that Labour might well lose power partly because of these cuts, then spend years in opposition trying to rebuild their social justice credentials while constantly being reminded of the time they implemented "the biggest cuts to disability benefits on record." It could become the albatross around their neck that makes their inevitable return to power much more difficult and much further away.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 10 hours ago
      @Cathedral city @Cathedral city - True, but if Labour are defeated because of the cuts, surely the Tories wont implement them?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @John @john, the masses will feel poorer when health and social services are further stretched because of benefit cuts and Reeves raises taxes to fund them .
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @John I don't think that is why the Tories lost in 2024.  It was because endless changes of leadership and treating the public with disdain.  As for the next election, heaven knows who will win. Probably a hung parliament, I guess.  Tories and reform, or Labour and Lib Dem.  What I don't get is why the Lib Dems aren't making more noise.  They should be gaining from Labours mistakes, but they're not doing anything.  Our politicians are a pathetic bunch.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 hours ago
      @Dave Dee The problem is, Kemi Badenoch has said the cuts don't go far enough. 
      We are caught between a rock and a hard place.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 hours ago
      @Dave Dee
      I don't think the disability cuts will determine if Labour wins the next general election. I think the ruling party loses power when the masses feel poorer. Even if the cause is outside of the government's control. 

      1960s US rolling adjustment triggers high interest rates and recession. Tories out Labour in
      1970s US backs Israel in the Yum Kippur war, OAPEC triggers the oil crisis. Labour out Tories in
      1990-1991 US savings and loans trigger global recession. Tories out Labour in
      2008-2009 US securities trigger global financial crisis. Labour out Tories in
      2022-2024 Russia invades Ukraine, Russia-EU Nord Stream pipelines destroyed, US and allies sanction Russia, cost of living crisis. Tories out Labour in
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Kendall is not delaying bringing legislation to parliament despite calls from MP's to do so.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 7 hours ago
      @Slb i bet this lot will do what the shameless torys did, make this a finance bill, which it isn't, just to screw the lords. if they dont' do this, then the lords can get their table tennis bats out, pingpong here we come.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @Dave Dee Well, she says she isn't, but there's no sign of a vote. And they need to make their mind up soon or it won't be through the Commons by recess.  And if there are amendments to deal with (and there almost certainly will be) it could get caught going back and forth. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 hours ago
      @Dave Dee It’s very arrogant and ill judged on her part. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    So Reeves announces new spending of Over ONE TRILLION POUNDS (figure quoted on BBC News)... Yet the Cuts to Disabilty Benefits are still going ahead!! More Proof that this is Labour Ideology.... It is not even about saving money - there is Over a Trillion to spend!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    I just don'see how it will be practicable to implement these pip changes in the proposed order - change the eligibility criteria then change the assessment criteria, so you might lose it then get it back, or keep/get it then lose it? In what world does this add u?

    "She said the Government wanted to look at “the assessment criteria” for PIP and how reforming it could “play a role in unlocking wider support”.

    But she argued this would “take time and require extensive engagement” which is why the government could not wait for its conclusion to make the changes to PIP eligibility criteria."

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/pip-cuts-to-arrive-in-2026-as-liz-kendall-rejects-plea-for-delay/ar-AA1GwcpI&ved=2ahUKEwi8zI3v5umNAxW2YEEAHaNsCGAQxfQBKAB6BAgKEAE&usg=AOvVaw2uZ-RpMQCFeS6CfDj9ZAIR
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Today’s Spending Review was an opportunity to end the crisis in our NHS and social care, break with years of neglect under the last Conservative Government, and finally start delivering the change that people were promised.

    Instead, this Labour Government has failed to deliver the ambition this country is crying out for.

    Watch my response to the Spending Review ➜

    Although we welcome the investment in health announced today, it will simply go to waste if we don’t address the elephant in the NHS waiting room - the crisis in social care. The social care review must be completed this year - not in three years - and local authorities must be given the resources to care for people in the community, not in hospitals.

    And instead of looking to cut already squeezed budgets, the Government should urgently pursue economic growth through a proper EU trade deal to unlock billions of pounds for our vital public services.

    They should negotiate a new, bespoke UK-EU customs union, the growth from which will boost the public finances by over £25 billion a year.

    They must back small businesses by overhauling business rates and scrapping the NICs hike.

    And by fixing the health and care sectors, more people can return to work and play a role in strengthening our economy.

    If the Government were to take these ambitious steps - while making big banks, social media companies, and gambling giants pay their fair share instead of small and family businesses - we could get public services back on their feet, keep our streets and our country safe, and help people in this cost-of-living crisis.

    Please share my response to the Spending Review with your friends and family, to show them the level of ambition that we Liberal Democrats have.

    It’s time the Government looked at our proposals to deliver real change for the country.

    If you share our values and want to fight for a fair deal for people across the country, join the Liberal Democrats today.

    Best wishes,

    Headshot of Daisy Cooper MP    
    Daisy Cooper MP (she/her)
    Deputy Leader & Treasury Spokesperson
    Liberal Democrats

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 9 hours ago
      @Matt I think they put up tax on gambling companies awhile ago it's 26 percent for online.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 hours ago
      @James Certainly agree about aggressively taxing gambling companies, Facebook etc al. But it won't happen. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    So, no mention of PIP and the cuts in the spending review.  Reeves avoided answering Mel Stride when he came back at her about the PIP cuts/welfare reform.

    Where does this leave things?  Are they going to try to slip through a seperate money bill and a later legislation for the changes to qualifying criteria etc?  Are they now running scared, knowing that it won't be voted through so they're staying silent and scheming on what to do?

    Have they done this to keep the narrative focused on the £113 billion of spending they've announced, trying to keep a positive spin and hope they can hoodwink the public, the media and buy off the MP's?

    No answers again today by the look of it.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 hours ago
      @FloMcF Cheers for sharing I filled that out and signed up
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Mick 5 billion seems such a small sum in the context of 113 billion. 

      And the effect of the 5 billion cuts will be catastrophic to so many.  Not so sure that the 113 billion will be so effective as leaving pip alone. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Mick They kept quiet about disability reforms before the Election , then dropped the bomb after they got in.  They are trying to talk round the rebels, I don't think it will work thought.   Also, if it's okay to post it,  I joined Martin Lewis Money and Mental health surveys/research group.  He;s just mailed that they are going to call on the government to ditch it's benefit reforms, from reading members responses to it.   Here is the link if you want to join  - https://moneyandmentalhealth.questionpro.eu/a/TakeSurvey?tt=473wAtel21mPlg%2B10r/NGw%3D%3D
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Mick I don't think there was ever likely to be mention of benefit cuts.  It is rather a different matter to the spending review.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Mick Number 3 is correct
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    Perhaps the Government believe the current batch of job seekers aren't up too scratch and they want the talents of the disabled.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Gingin So agree. At government level they could do so much to help to remove barriers to work, instead of leaving vulnerable people out in the cold. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Cecelia Bert?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 1 days ago
      @Cecelia Judging from the amazing people here they’d be right to seek their talents- it would just be good if that were done through genuinely removing barriers to work rather than repeatedly beating and denigrating disabled people 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 1 days ago
    A councillor who didn’t just swot me away with a ‘I’m not your ward councillor, go speak to someone else’:

    Dear John,

    Thank you for your response- it’s heartening and much appreciated. Yes, I’ve spoken to Anna Sabine and Ed Davey who have both agreed with my concerns. In fact, Ed Davey even raised my family’s case in PMQs. I hope that you’ll feel able to raise these issues in whatever local forum you feel appropriate and wherever you have a voice.

    Kind regards,

    G**

    On 11 Jun 2025, at 13:33, John Leach (CLLR) <John_Leach@bathnes.gov.uk> wrote:


    Dear Ms ***,

    Thank you for writing to me about the way that the proposed benefits cuts are certain to increase the demands made on council social and welfare services. It should be obvious to everyone that taking funds away from people with very limited or inadequate resources will cause those people great difficulty. It is a sad comment on the moral compass of the new Government that they feel that cutting benefits is the appropriate response to the need to help to balance the annual budget whereas increasing taxes on the very wealth who have an enormous surfeit of personal resources is not. I have no doubt that your MP and mine, both of whom are LibDems, will oppose these cuts in principle, for the harms they will cause those people in our communities who are in or near to poverty, and for the additional burden these cuts will place on local authorities. I shall speak with my MP about this and I trust you are already doing the same with your MP.

    Best wishes

    John

    John Leach
    B&NES councillor for the ward of Walcot

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

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

 
iContact