Labour's welfare cuts consultation called a ‘sham' as PIP changes not up for discussion

The millions of benefit claimants affected by Labour's planned changes to welfare will soon be able to have their say on the controversial package, but with one crucial catch: they aren't allowed to talk about the planned cuts.
This is because several of the policies will not be included in the consultation, the Department for Work and Pension's (DWP) 'Pathways to Work' green paper reveals, prompting campaigners and charities to label the process a 'sham'.
Amounting to £4.8 billion in welfare cuts, Labour's proposed changes would scale back some of the key health-related entitlements in the UK.
The biggest cost-cutting measure in the package are the changes to the personal independence payment (PIP) – claimed by 3.6 million people – which make up 85 per cent of the savings.
Alongside this is a freeze to the rate the Universal Credit health element for existing claimants, and the move to nearly halve it for new claimants.
But neither of these measures will be included in the DWP's consultation, meaning disabled people will not be asked to discuss the changes at any of the sessions. In total, only half of the 22 policies proposed in the package will be in the scope of the conversations.
Those interested in sharing their views have been invited to attend one of 15 in-person or online sessions which will be taking place across the UK for 12 weeks, from April to June.
Announcing the start of the consultation on Monday, social security and disability minister, Sir Stephen Timms said: 'We inherited a broken welfare system, which incentivises ill-health, locks people out of work and isn't fit for a future in which so many of us will face long-term health conditions.
'We want a system that genuinely works for disabled people and those with health conditions, as well as the country and the economy, and we want to hear their views and voices at the heart of the new system.
'I encourage people to engage so they can have their say as we listen, learn and deliver support which will help millions into work, put welfare spending on a more sustainable path, and unlock growth as part of our Plan for Change.'
But a coalition of 21 groups called the Disabled People's Organisation (DPO) Forum has now written an open letter to work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall raising 'serious concerns with the human rights implications' of the consultation process.
The letter, signed by Disability Rights UK and Amnesty International, says the DWP has clearly already decided on some of the most substantial policies in the package, going against the Cabinet Office's own rules on consultations.
It adds that it is also concerned about its delay in publishing accessible versions of the paper, as well as the possibility that MPs will be voting on the policies without being able to see an analysis of how they will help people into work.
'In short, the consultation is essentially a sham – it removes our rights as Disabled people to take part in civic society,' the signatories say, adding that Labour must 'ensure that all proposals are open to consultation and public scrutiny, and reissue consultation questions which cover all policy proposals within the paper (not just those that DWP have chosen to include).'
In January, the High Court found that a consultation on changes welfare health assessments that were proposed by the previous Conservative government were unlawful due to being 'unfair and misleading.'
In his judgement, Mr Justice Calver said the eight-week consultation was 'rushed' and 'unfair,' finding it failed to reflect the 'substantial' loss of benefits many claimants would have faced as a result of the planned changes.
He added it gave the 'misleading impression' that the plans were about supporting people into work when cutting welfare spending was likely the 'central basis'.
Responding to the judgement at the time, Labour said it would 'address its shortcomings' at its own consultation. However, the DPO Forum writes that it notes'striking similarities to this process in the green paper with serious concerns.'
A DWP spokesperson said: 'We have set out a sweeping package of reforms to health and disability benefits to make urgent changes so people are genuinely supported into work, while putting the welfare system on a more sustainable footing, so that the safety net is always there to protect those who need it most.
'The publication of all accessible versions triggered the start of the official consultation, providing everyone with 12 weeks to respond.
'We encourage people to engage with the consultation, so a wide range of voices are reflected in the responses we receive.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

8 hours ago

• Yahoo

Sir Keir Starmer tries to contain rebellion among Labour MPs over welfare reforms

Sir Keir Starmer had a series of one-on-one meetings with Labour MPs on Friday to try to contain a rebellion on the government's welfare reforms. Ahead of the assisted dying vote, the met privately with some of the dozens of MPs with concerns about the proposed cuts to sickness and disability benefits. The first vote on the legislation, which the says will save £5bn a year from the welfare bill, will be held in early July. The prime minister's involvement at this stage suggests a major effort is underway to quell a potential rebellion. Cabinet ministers say they do not expect mass resignations, but one junior minister told Sky News that opposition to the reforms was "pretty strong". One frontbencher, government whip Vicky Foxcroft, , writing that she understood "the need to address the ever-increasing welfare bill" but did not believe the proposed cuts "should be part of the solution". Other junior ministers and whips have not, as yet, moved to follow her. But one government insider said: "It's difficult to tell if the mood will harden as we get closer. There's a lot of work going on." The package of reforms is aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work, but dozens of Labour rebels said last month that the proposals were . Welfare secretary Liz Kendall is also meeting individually with MPs. She said earlier this week that the welfare system is "at a crossroads" and the bill was about "compassion, opportunity and dignity". Read more from Sky News: Ministers are trying to convince MPs that a £1bn fund to support disabled people into work, and the scrapping of the Work Capability Assessment, a key demand of disability groups, make the cuts package worth voting for. They insist that 90% of current claimants of personal independence payment (PIP) will not lose the benefit. But disability groups say the cuts will have a "disastrous" effect on vulnerable people.

Yahoo

12 hours ago

• Yahoo

MPs may have passed the assisted dying bill, but the debate is just beginning

Now that the assisted dying bill has passed its momentous third reading in the House of Commons, it may seem like legalisation in England and Wales is a done deal. But despite this significant milestone, the bill is not yet law and its journey through the House of Lords is far from a formality. While the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill is now closer than ever to becoming law, both the Commons and the Lords must agree on its final wording. And just like in the Commons, there are passionate supporters and vocal opponents in the Lords. Peers are expected to focus their attention on a number of outstanding, and controversial, issues. One of the biggest concerns that surfaced during both the report stage and today's third reading relates to the speed and process of drafting the legislation. Because this is a private member's bill, introduced by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, it was subject to strict timelines. Leadbeater had just 85 days to work with legal drafters and set out a policy framework before the bill was published ahead of its second reading in November 2024. Despite this, the democracy-supporting charity the Hansard Society has noted that the bill is 'among the most heavily scrutinised in recent times', and it could ultimately receive up to 200 hours of parliamentary debate, especially now that it has moved to the Lords. Still, the fast turnaround meant that many important decisions, such as what medications will be approved for use in assisted dying, have been left for the secretary of state to determine later through what's known as delegated legislation (secondary laws made without a full parliamentary vote). One area likely to receive particular scrutiny is the bill's inclusion of so-called 'Henry VIII clauses'. These are controversial powers that allow ministers to make changes to existing primary legislation, effectively altering acts of parliament without needing a new law. A key example is clause 38 that would let ministers revise the NHS Act 2006 to formally include assisted dying within NHS services. Several amendments aimed at strengthening the bill's safeguards were supported during the Commons stages. These included the introduction of independent advocates, a new disability advisory board, and additional protections for people with learning disabilities, mental health conditions, or autism. An amendment from Labour MP Naz Shah was also supported at the third reading, ensuring that a person who chooses to stop eating and drinking will not automatically be considered terminally ill. This is a protection designed to prevent the system being used inappropriately. Yet despite these measures, concerns remain. Critics worry about the risk of coercion, both from others and self imposed. There is particular unease about people feeling pressured to choose assisted dying because they consider themselves a burden. Questions have also been raised about whether those with conditions like anorexia might qualify for assisted dying under the current wording of the bill. Even with the new safeguards, including mandatory training for doctors to detect coercion and assess mental capacity, many feel the bill needs tighter definitions and clearer criteria to protect the most vulnerable. The impact on palliative and end-of-life care continues to be a major point of debate. Today, MPs backed an amendment from Liberal Democrat MP Munira Wilson that would require the government to assess the state of palliative care services within one year of the law being enacted. Peers in the House of Lords may push further on this issue. Some may argue that before a person can request assisted dying, they should first be referred to a palliative care specialist to fully understand their options. Others may want the law to spell out more clearly who is qualified to assess these requests. Another key question is who should provide assisted dying services. The British Medical Association has previously suggested a model where assisted dying operates outside the core NHS system. This would be a kind of parallel service overseen by the health secretary but delivered by independent providers. This would be similar to how early medical abortions are offered in some parts of the UK. Time is tight in the Lords, so peers will probably focus on a few high priority areas. Any amendments will need to be proposed, debated and approved quickly if the bill is to continue progressing this session. Even if the bill passes, it includes a four year implementation period to allow for the development of more detailed policies, including training for professionals, protocols for medication and clearer guidance on safeguarding. The passing of the bill in the Commons is historic. But the national conversation on assisted dying is not over. And the next phase will determine how this sensitive and deeply personal issue is handled in practice. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Suzanne Ost has previously received funding from the AHRC for her assisted dying research. Nancy Preston receives funding from Horizon Europe, Horizon 2020 and the NIHR

Yahoo

15 hours ago

• Yahoo

Voices: Poll of the day: Do you support the assisted dying bill?

The assisted dying bill returns to Parliament today for its final reading amid growing controversy – and a vote that could determine whether the legislation moves forward or falls entirely. A group of Labour MPs dramatically withdrew their support on Thursday night, citing serious concerns about the removal of key safeguards, including the requirement for High Court oversight. They warned that the bill had been 'drastically weakened' and no longer offers enough protection for vulnerable patients. If passed, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow people in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for a medically assisted death. Approval would be required from two doctors and a panel including a senior legal figure, a social worker, and a psychiatrist. Campaigners are making a final push on both sides of the debate, and with a narrow majority at stake, every vote counts. MPs have a free vote and are not bound by party lines. Supporters argue that the bill offers dignity and choice to those in need. Meanwhile, opponents argue it opens the door to abuse and erodes trust in end-of-life care. With so much at stake and such deeply personal questions at the heart of this debate, we want to hear from you: do you support the assisted dying bill? Vote in our poll and let us know your thoughts in the comments.