Feb 132026
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net
Ahead of the Senedd elections, you are invited to this hybrid joint conference and discussion organised by Unite Community Wales and Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru).

 

Saturday 21st February 2026, 11am to 3pm

Hybrid at the Unite the Union Office, 1 Cathedral Road, Cardiff, CF11 9SD, or online via Teams.

Please register in advance here

Note: if attending via Teams, please put this under Access Requirements.

This is a free event; you don’t have to pay anything to attend.

You don’t have to be a member of DPAC or of Unite to attend.

 


 

Unite Community is a section of the trade union Unite for anyone not in paid employment.

A logo with rainbow-coloured people linking arms. It was Wales Unite Community Membership Cymru.

 

DPAC Cymru is the Welsh section of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC)
Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru logo.
Jan 152026
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

The words "We want an Independent PIP Review" in bold and black text, with Independent highlighted in red. On the left there is a tear-out effect of a greyscale photo of a disability protest, and a red-tinted photo of Stephen Timms, the disability minister.

As the UK Government review into the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) gets underway, a disability campaign group in Wales has today launched an open appeal to the panel members.

The ‘Timms review’, named for the Minister of State for Social Security and Disability Sir Stephen Timms, could affect more than 275,000 people in Wales claiming the disability benefit.

Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) have, however, raised a number of concerns over the fairness of the review.

They say there are longstanding unaddressed concerns with the way the Pathways to Work consultation was carried out last year, particularly in Wales, and they want the review to examine this to make sure those mistakes aren’t repeated.

They say they are also appealing to the panellists to make sure that the review is genuine, that the outcome is not predetermined, and are calling for participation to be widened.

DPAC Cymru’s call for an independent review, democratically led by disabled people and their organisations, received wide support in Wales from disability groups, trade union organisations, and politicians.

At a lobby of the Senedd late last year, Sioned Williams MS, Plaid Cymru, said “Plaid Cymru backs their call for an independent review of PIP, led by disabled people.”

Dr. Atlaf Hussain MS, Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Equalities & Social Justice, Conservative, also said “I fully support Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) and their call for an independent, disabled-led review of Personal Independence Payment (PIP).”

Click here to read the letter to the panel members.

Click here for the Easy Read version.

A graphic of the DPAC Cymru logo. There is the main DPAC logo to the left, which is a red, pink, blue, and green circle being held by four hands of different skin tones, with the words "disabled people against cuts" surrounding it, and an upside-down black traingle in the middle bearing the letters D P A C. On the right is the word Cymru (pronounced cum ree) (C Y M R U) in large letters, and the background of the letters are cutouts of the Welsh flag. Above Cymru (pronounced cum ree) is written the words Disabled People Against Cuts. Below Cymru (pronounced cum ree) are the words Rights, not charity, and the equivilant phrase translated into the Welsh language.

The six “headline” asks of the appeal letter are that:

1. The review should examine how disabled people in Wales were treated unfairly by the UK Government last year, and make sure those mistakes aren’t repeated.

2. The review must be genuine, not predetermined.

3. The review must be independent, democratically led by disabled people and our organisations.

4. The review must have wide participation.

5. The review needs a wider scope for it to be successful.

6. The review must engage with the 1.4 million disabled workers organised democratically in their trade unions.

No matter what the review concludes, the final say rests with ministers. DPAC Cymru will do our part to ensure that disabled people & carers are prepared to defeat the Government again if necessary.

Nov 142025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net
A graphic with a hot pink background and white text. In the background is a large pop-art style dark pink word that says "free". Over the image are the words: "Palestine film festival. West Norwood. Wednesday 19th November 2025, 7pm. Off the cuff, Herne Hill, SE24 0JN"

A selection of short films from Gaza, focusing on the impact of the genocide on Disabled Palestinians.

‘Palestine & Disability’ is part of the Palestinian Free Film Festival, the event will be closing out our festival.

You can read more about the festival here

The event will take place at the accessible venue Off the Cuff in Herne Hill (London) on 19th November, and we will be raising money for Palestinian groups, as well as paying to run this and future events.

The event is a completely free shorts film night documenting the experiences of Disabled people in Palestine, featuring three films and Q and A.

You can read more about the event/films here as well as how to get tickets here.

We are extremely excited that Q&A following the films will be led by DPAC’s very own Ellen Clifford. We feel very honoured to have her at the event.

We are really keen that Disabled people, and those involved in the disability rights movement hear the stories in these films, and are able to partake in this event and this conversation.

We are grateful for any feedback in how we can create as an inclusive space as possible.

We will shortly be promoting the event on our instagram after our second to film night.

In Solidarity,

Thomas (WN4P)

A logo that says "West Norwood for Palestine" using the number four instead of the word. The logo has an image of a watermelon slice in red and green.
Oct 302025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Contents

DWP’s plans ‘in tatters’ as McFadden scraps white paper on further disability cuts 1

Shocking’ figures show parents linked to DWP service face death rates up to three times higher 3

Former detective exposes culture of disability discrimination within ‘institutionally disablist’ Met 6

Committee calls cuts bill ‘discriminatory’, even though all its Labour MPs voted for it 10

Disabled people warn of ‘severe’ consequences if chancellor removes Motability VAT exemption 13

Disabled people face ‘systemic’ barriers in accessing community equipment, parliamentary inquiry finds 16

Regulator’s annual report shows impact of social care crisis on disabled people 18

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week 19

 

 

DWP’s plans ‘in tatters’ as McFadden scraps white paper on further disability cuts

Ministers have dumped plans for a major white paper containing a swathe of further cuts and reforms to disability benefits, following months of activism by disabled people and allies that forced the government into a major U-turn this summer.

Work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden, who only took on the role last month, confirmed the move in a meeting with representatives of disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) earlier this month.

One DPO said yesterday (Wednesday) that the admission was a “major success” for disabled people who fought the summer cuts bill.

But DPOs also warned that activists would need to keep up the pressure on ministers because McFadden had made it clear that, despite abandoning the white paper – which is likely to have significant political implications for the Labour government – individual measures would be taken forward.

He insisted in the meeting – first revealed this week by Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People – that further reforms would go ahead, but they would be introduced individually rather than all together in a white paper.

The white paper was set to be based on many of the measures outlined in the Pathways to Work green paper, and responses to a subsequent public consultation.

The results of that consultation should be published before the end of this year.

The decision to bin the white paper means that many of the reforms suggested in March’s green paper – including removing the health element of universal credit for those under 22; reform, and possibly cuts, to Access to Work; a time-limited replacement for contributory employment and support allowance; scrapping the work capability assessment; and changes to the safeguarding, conditionality and sanctions regimes – are likely to be announced separately over the coming months.

Some – but not all – of the reforms will still require legislation.

McFadden’s admission that he had dumped the white paper was made in a meeting on 14 October with Fazilet Hadi and Svetlana Kotova from umbrella organisation DPO Forum England.

Hadi, head of policy for Disability Rights UK, told Disability News Service (DNS): “I definitely think that the amazing campaigning from disabled people and our allies against the PIP cuts has left the government feeling very bruised.

The change of heart in publishing a DWP white paper, and the delay in launching the SEND white paper, bear this out.

Having said this, Pat McFadden has been moved to DWP to drive through cuts to social security, so the lack of a white paper doesn’t mean that there won’t be further threats to the benefits of disabled people.

It just means that those threats won’t all come at once.”

Kotova, director of campaigns and justice at Inclusion London, agreed.

She said: “There is a pause, but it does not mean reforms won’t be coming.

And we need to keep the pressure and persuade or force the government to switch its focus from cutting benefits or ‘fixing us’ to be more work ready to putting resources and its attention to making workplaces more inclusive.”

Among their arguments in the meeting, she said, was for the government to move money from employment support towards the Access to Work scheme.

Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, has lodged a parliamentary question about the “deeply disturbing” situation after being alerted by DNS.

He said: “At the time of a cost-of-living crisis, it is concerning that the secretary of state could be moving away from a more thoughtful, considered approach, to one more driven by cuts than by strategy.

This will only add to the stress and uncertainty that disabled people are facing with the threat of more cuts to disability benefits next year.

I have therefore asked the secretary of state a named day parliamentary question to find out when (if at all!) the white paper will be published, to try to shed some light on this fraught situation.”

Rick Burgess, from Greater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People, who first revealed publicly that the white paper had been dumped, told DNS: “They are not confident that they will get a big piece of legislation through parliament anymore.

It shows we really scared them. It’s a huge embarrassment for them. All their plans are in tatters, and they are afraid of losing another showdown in parliament.

A Starmer government couldn’t survive another drubbing.”

But he said he did not think ministers had changed their attitudes towards welfare reform, only that they were not confident they could push a large bill through parliament.

And he said it would be much harder for disabled people to stop a stream of smaller reforms, and that “keeping track of them is going to be really tricky”.

Linda Burnip, co-founder of Disabled People Against Cuts, said the government’s move to drop the white paper was “obviously a major success for disability rights activists and the many months of campaigning”.

But she said it appeared likely that ministers would use secondary legislation to “sneak things through in dribs and drabs and hope changes won’t be noticed”.

McFadden told Fazilet Hadi and Svetlana Kotova at the meeting that no decisions had yet been taken on barring under-22s from the health component of universal credit, and that it was a priority of his to get more young people into work.

They said he seemed to indicate that time-limiting contributory benefits would be taken forward relatively soon.

Hadi said: “We emphasised the need for government to join up its policies on disabled people and to coproduce solutions with us.

We urged him to move funding to the Access to Work scheme from the additional money being spent on employment support.”

Reforms – and almost certainly cuts – to personal independence payment are expected to follow next autumn, following a review being headed by Sir Stephen Timms, the minister for social security and disability.

Sir Stephen today (Thursday) launched the review, and announced his disabled co-chairs – Dr Clenton Farquharson and Sharon Brennan – as well as a recruitment process for the 12 members of a steering group that will jointly lead the review.

He said the majority of this steering group would be disabled people or representatives of DPOs.

DWP had not commented on McFadden’s admission by noon today (Thursday).

30 October 2025

 

 

Shocking’ figures show parents linked to DWP service face death rates up to three times higher

Parents who pay to support a child through the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and its Child Maintenance Service (CMS) face death rates up to three times higher than others the same age, according to “shocking” and “deeply troubling” new figures.

Analysis by Disability News Service (DNS) has shown that, for every age group between 20 and 54, those who use the service – known as “paying parents”* – face a much higher rate of death than those of the same age who do not have to deal with the CMS.

DNS carried out the analysis using figures obtained from DWP through a freedom of information request.

The request followed concerns raised by campaigners who have called for an inquiry into the deaths of parents driven to take their own lives by DWP’s refusal to correct errors in child support demands.

The figures, which are particularly exaggerated for younger age groups, have been passed to the Commons work and pensions committee, which is at the early stages of an inquiry into concerns about CMS.

Among the inquiry’s aims will be how to “improve the way it deals with families”, and concerns over how CMS calculates payments, and enforcement of its decisions.

The DNS analysis shows that, for all those aged 20 to 24 in England and Wales, the rate of deaths in 2024 was 0.04 per cent, compared with 0.13 per cent for CMS paying parents (more than three times higher).

For those aged 25 to 29, the rate of death was more than twice as high for paying parents, and for those 30 to 34 it was twice as high (0.12 per cent versus 0.06 per cent).

The difference in death rates narrows for older age groups, but there is still a substantial difference for every group analysed by DNS, with CMS paying parents aged 50 to 54 facing a death rate of 0.46 per cent in 2024, compared with 0.34 per cent for all adults in that age group.

Results for 2022 and 2023 show similar, striking differences.

Over those three years, there is not a single age group between 20 and 54 – the only groups examined in the analysis – where the death rates are not higher for paying parents than for all adults in England and Wales.

Although the figures do not show how many of these deaths were suicides, they do add strong evidence to the claims of campaigners who believe the higher rates of death for paying parents are at least partly caused by errors by CMS and its toxic culture, including its refusal to correct its mistakes. 

DWP said this week that it was carrying out reforms aimed at streamlining CMS but that it did not “recognise” the DNS figures or any suggestion of a causal link between the actions and culture of CMS and the deaths of paying parents, although it did not point out any errors in the DNS calculations.

Ian Briggs, from research and campaign group STOPS (StopSuicides UK), which focuses on the harm caused by CMS, said: “I, and many others, have long known that the CMS and the DWP have been responsible for driving many parents to suicide.

For years we have tried to highlight this to the DWP, yet every attempt is met with the same denial – that there is no link between the CMS and suicides.

Even when presented with clear and credible evidence gathered by the STOPS group, the official response from ministers has remained one of outright dismissal.”

His son Gavin took his own life five years ago.

The coroner at Gavin’s inquest refused to investigate his father’s claims that the actions of the CMS had contributed to his decision to take his own life, even though the agency had wrongly claimed he owed £16,000 in support payments, after claiming his income was £76,000 rather than the £26,000 it was in reality.

Ian Briggs said this week: “The mortality rates recently revealed through John’s** research and exposed by Disability News Service cannot all be explained away as coincidence.

While not every death may be due to suicide, these figures reveal a deeply troubling pattern that demands urgent scrutiny.

At some point, there must be a full and independent public inquiry into these disturbing facts and the systemic failures within the CMS and DWP that continue to destroy lives and families.

I would like to personally thank John and Disability News Service for… exposing these shocking mortality rates, and for giving a voice to the countless families – like mine – who have suffered unimaginable loss.”

Craig Bulman, who was left with PTSD after the Child Support Agency mishandled his case – the agency, the predecessor of CMS, eventually paid him a £5,000 consolatory payment – said the figures uncovered by DNS were “shocking”.

He told DNS: “Even allowing for statistical margins, the death rates you’ve calculated are deeply disturbing and point to something seriously wrong within the Child Maintenance Service.”

The Child Support Agency’s failings left Bulman homeless, triggered a mental breakdown, and caused the loss of his job.

He said this week: “These figures confirm what families have been warning for years – that the Child Maintenance Service is operating without proper oversight or duty of care.

Death rates among paying parents are up to three times higher than the national average, and yet the DWP has failed to investigate or publish these findings. 

This now warrants an independent inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005.”

In January 2023, during the final session of a previous inquiry into CMS by the Commons work and pensions committee, Labour MP Debbie Abrahams told of a paying parent whose arrears had been inaccurately assessed “and the frustration that he found ultimately led to him taking his life”.

She said his mother had previously written to DWP “expressing real concerns about mental health” but there had been no reply.

She added: “This is not the first time. We had a panel before Christmas that also provided data about the suicides of paying parents who were inaccurately assessed in terms of the arrears that they owed.

This is tens of thousands of pounds that they said that they owe, leaving literally pounds for them to exist on.”

She asked Tory work and pensions minister Viscount Younger at the time if DWP collected data on suicides of paying parents.

He told her: “Could I just say that, being new into the department, I am already aware, having seen some of the correspondence that I have had to look at and sign off on, of some absolutely tragic cases?

It is absolutely appalling that cases can lead to people taking their own lives.

That is dreadful and we must look at all ways in which we can avoid that or have systems and processes that do not lead to that.”

Despite those comments, a DWP spokesperson said this week: “Over 780,000 people engage with the Child Maintenance Service, many of whom are experiencing a difficult time in their lives, and all staff are trained to support vulnerable customers.

We do not recognise this data or suggestions of a causal link between the CMS and deaths among parents.”

*Child maintenance covers how a child’s living costs are paid when one of the parents does not live with the child

**DNS editor John Pring

***The following organisations are among those that might be able to offer support if you have been affected by the issues raised in this article:  MindPapyrusRethinkSamaritans, and SOS Silence of Suicide

30 October 2025

 

 

Former detective exposes culture of disability discrimination within ‘institutionally disablist’ Met

A culture of institutional disability discrimination within the Metropolitan police is exposed today by the former head of its disabled staff association.

Dave Campbell, who retired this year after serving 32 years as a police officer, has told Disability News Service (DNS) that he believes disability discrimination within the force is rampant and that the Met is institutionally disablist.

He believes this “corporate culture” impacts how the force engages with disabled members of the public.

Campbell was chair of the Met’s Disabled Staff Association (DSA) for six years, and he was also vice-president of the Disabled Police Association of England and Wales.

His disclosures come only days after DNS revealed that prosecutions of disability hate crime across the country were continuing to plummet, with police forces in England and Wales passing on just a tiny proportion of recorded cases to prosecutors.

For six years, Campbell repeatedly tried to persuade the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to act on his concerns, before his retirement earlier this year.

It was his intervention that ensured the recent Casey review of the force’s internal culture and standards of behaviour examined the treatment of disabled people, when its initial focus was on racism, sexism and homophobia.

He believes the review provided an “alarming insight into how disabled people feel about their place in the organisation”, as he told Met commissioner Sir Mark Rowley in a letter last year.

He has told DNS that the upper levels of the Met have made it clear through their actions and inflexible policies – which he says marginalise disabled staff, and stem from outdated attitudes – that they do not want people who become disabled to continue serving as police officers in the force.

He says several disabled officers and staff have left the force because of their disability-related treatment and have written directly to the commissioner expressing their “despair and concerns”, without receiving any acknowledgement.

Over the four years between 2019 and 2023, he says, more than 200 disability discrimination employment tribunal claims were taken against the Met, including a significant number which included claims of race or gender discrimination.

The Casey review found an even higher number – 358 – in the five years between 2017-18 and 2021-22, but it was criticised by disabled campaigners for concluding that MPS was institutionally racist, sexist and homophobic, but not that it was institutionally disablist.

Campbell believes the number of disability discrimination tribunal cases increased after the Casey review by up to 60 per cent in 2023-24 compared to the previous year, while the DSA received hundreds of emails from distressed colleagues about the way they were being treated by their managers.

He has told Sir Mark that disability-led internal grievances are also at a high level, while many of his members had “no confidence or trust in the grievance management process” or in the ability of the Culture, Diversity and Inclusion directorate – set up after the Casey review – to produce change.

In the wake of Casey’s report, Campbell – as DSA chair – commissioned an independent review of disability inclusion and workplace adjustments in the force, by the Business Disability Forum (BDF), which reported its findings in September 2024.

Disabled colleagues in the DSA were asked if they had witnessed or personally experienced unfair treatment at work through disability-related harassment, bullying or discrimination, and 358 of the 775 who responded to the survey said yes (46 per cent), and another 123 (16 per cent) said maybe, a total of 62 per cent.

Of 504 police officers, 49 per cent said yes, and 15 per cent said maybe, a total of 64 per cent.

Of the 775 responses from disabled officers and civilian staff, less than 20 per cent (160) agreed with the statement: “MPS is an organisation that recognises and values disabled people.”

And just 65 (eight per cent) agreed that “feedback and complaints are listened to”.

One respondent said: “If you treated any of the other protected characteristics as you did disability then there would be uproar and heads would roll.”

Campbell believes the BDF report supports the view that MPS is institutionally disablist.

He told Sir Mark in last year’s letter: “In my experience Disability discrimination in the MPS is viewed less significantly and addressed differently in comparison to Race, Homophobia, Gender or any other type of Discrimination…”

In an earlier letter to Sir Mark, in 2022, Campbell told him: “There needs to be a change in attitudes [towards disabled officers] and an end to conscious labelling, as sick, lame, lazy, shirker, which are all derogatory terms yet seemingly acceptable…”

He has yet to receive any “tangible” response to the concerns he raised in last year’s letter and the survey report.

Campbell, a detective sergeant before his retirement, has himself twice taken successful action against the Met for disability discrimination, winning the first case at tribunal and then securing an MPS settlement before the start of a tribunal for the second case.

He describes himself as a person of ethnic origin, and has experienced intersectional discrimination, which he says is widespread in the Met.

He said the same complaints are being made “time and time again” at tribunal and through the force’s internal grievance process, which shows there is a “systemic” problem and failure to address these issues through an absence of “corporate memory” and a lack of “morality”.

Currently, about 3,500 police officers have adjustments made for them to allow them to continue in their roles, he said, out of about 36,000 officers in total across the force.

Campbell believes the number of MPS disabled officers and civilian staff may be as high as 10,000 – almost a quarter of the workforce – because many staff do not share their impairment with the force “due to concerns of how they will be treated”.

The Met’s DSA has more than 6,500 members and has 37 peer-to-peer support networks for disabled staff.

Campbell says he has increasingly been coming across incidents where the force’s occupational health department is making recommendations for adjustments to be made for officers who become disabled – often caused by their duties – but managers are refusing to agree to these adjustments.

Instead, officers are often told: “If you cannot do the job then you should just leave,” or: “This isn’t the right job for you.”

He told DNS: “We are just hitting a brick wall. This is about holding the police to account for systemic behaviour both internally and externally.

If these attitudes exist towards disabled people in the workforce, what hopes do disabled people have when they become victims of crime?”

Louise Holden, Inclusion London’s senior policy officer for disabled people and crime, said: “I admire Dave Campbell and his tireless work within a disablist organisation.

I share Mr Campbell’s concerns about how the Met treat disabled victims when their attitude to their own disabled staff is so appalling.

Things have gotten worse since the A New Met for London plan following the Casey review.

The work Inclusion London was involved in stopped and the new structure is a closed shop.

Community confidence is at an all-time low.

There has been no follow-up to the Casey review and with the Met decision to stop investigating non-hate crime incidents, without any consultation, it’s clear the Met is just not interested in disability issues.

There has been no radical reform, only half-baked gestures and platitudes that amount to nothing.

We are calling for renewed engagement with us, so we can support the Met with our expert knowledge on these issues.

I hope the Met is ashamed of how they have behaved since the Casey review and want to work with us again.”

Commander Simon Messinger, the Met’s professionalism and senior lead for disability, said: “We are fully committed to driving positive change across the Met and fostering a culture of inclusion, and have taken significant steps to improve how we support disabled colleagues.

This progress has helped us to achieve Disability Confident level three status, the highest level of recognition within that scheme, which reflects our determination to improve how we recruit, retain, and support our staff.

We know there is much more to be done and will continue to work with the Met police Disabled Staff Association, and partners such as the Business Disability Forum, to drive further progress.”

A spokesperson for the mayor of London said: “The mayor is clear there is no place for harassment or discrimination in the workplace and is committed to working with the Met police to deliver a New Met for London where everyone can thrive.

Since the Baroness Casey review in 2023 the Met has implemented a number of improvements for disabled employees, including the introduction of disability passports, Disability Smart assessments and the force is now a Disability Confident employer, improving how they recruit, retain and develop disabled staff.

But there is more to do and the Met is working closely with the Disability Independent Advisory Group and the new chair of its Disabled Staff Association to listen and act on concerns to deliver a fairer and more inclusive Met.”

*If you have information about a police officer or member of staff who works for the Met and is corrupt or abusing their position and power, you can call the force’s anti-corruption and abuse hotline anonymously on 0800 085 0000

30 October 2025

 

 

Committee calls cuts bill ‘discriminatory’, even though all its Labour MPs voted for it

A Labour-led committee of MPs has called the government’s universal credit cuts act “discriminatory” and warned that it will push disabled people into poverty, despite every one of its Labour members voting for the legislation in July.

The Universal Credit Act will see the health element of universal credit halved for most new claimants from 6 April next year, from £105 to £54 a week.

All seven Labour MPs on the committee* voted for this cut in July.

But Labour’s Debbie Abrahams, who chairs the committee, said this week: “This is not only discriminatory, but without mitigations, will potentially push more people with disabilities and health conditions into poverty, exacerbating their condition and pushing them further away from the labour market.”

She was commenting on the publication of the government’s response to the committee’s report on the Pathways to Work green paper.

Her committee’s report had called on the government to delay the cut to the health element until it had carried out an “independent and comprehensive assessment of the impact the change could have on disabled people”.

But in this week’s response, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) dismissed those concerns.

Instead, it pointed to the “sustained, above inflation increase” to the standard allowance of universal credit (UC), which will also be introduced through the bill.

It said that this, together with the cut to the health element, would address “perverse incentives in the UC system and better encourages those who can work to enter or return to employment”.

Asked why she had voted for the cut to the health element when she thought it was discriminatory and would push more disabled people into poverty, Abrahams told Disability News Service (DNS) in a statement: “I worked very hard to secure major concessions on removing the cuts to PIP and people currently on UC health in the welfare bill.

The bill isn’t perfect, and that was reflected in the work and pensions Pathways to Work report and its recommendations.

However, voting against the bill would have meant that the increase in the standard allowance wouldn’t have gone ahead, and that was seen as a major positive aspect of the bill.

This increase is not just for this year, but for each year until the end of this parliament.

I am still continuing to work hard on securing mitigations around the reduction in support for newly disabled people from April next year and I remain committed to ensuring disabled people across the country have access to the support they need.”

Meanwhile, DWP has refused to explain to the committee what assessment it made of the bill’s impact on safeguarding, before the legislation was introduced to parliament earlier this year.

The bill had originally included steep cuts to personal independence payment (PIP), before a backbench Labour rebellion – following three months of activism from disabled people and allies – led to those measures being removed.

But there has been almost no discussion in parliament – and little or no information from ministers – on the bill’s potential impact on safeguarding claimants.

In its response to the committee’s report, DWP has made no mention of safeguarding, although it said that it had carried out an equality impact assessment for the bill.

But the impact assessments published on parliament’s website make no reference to safeguarding.

Asked by DNS why it failed to respond properly to the committee’s recommendation to release its assessment of the bill’s impact on safeguarding, and whether it did assess the safeguarding implications of the original bill, DWP said it was looking to improve its safeguarding approach, which included a review of the green paper consultation responses.

A DWP spokesperson said: “Our welfare reforms package was appropriately advised and numerous protections were baked into our plans.

We are shifting our focus from welfare to work, skills, and opportunities, so more people can move out of poverty and into good, secure jobs as part of our Plan for Change – backed by £1 billion a year for employment support by the end of the decade.”

Grassroots groups of disabled people, such as Black TriangleDisabled People Against Cutsthe Mental Health Resistance Network, and the Spartacus network, spent years highlighting deaths linked to DWP’s actions.

Concerns have also been raised by relatives who have called for action after the deaths of their family members.

Some of the evidence linking DWP with the deaths of benefit claimants has come through prevention of future deaths reports written by coroners, several of which only emerged years after they were written.

Other evidence of persistent DWP safeguarding flaws has emerged through freedom of information requests to the department, which have revealed how hundreds of recommendations for improvements have been made by DWP’s own secret reviews into the deaths of claimants.

Some of these reviews showed DWP staff continuing to make the same fatal errors, year after year.

The evidence collected by DNS and others, stretching back more than a decade, has shown how DWP repeatedly ignored recommendations to improve the safety of its disability benefits assessment system, leading to countless avoidable deaths.

It also shows how DWP hid evidence from independent reviews, and how the department failed to keep track of the actions taken in response to recommendations made by its own secret reviews.

Evidence also demonstrates that the cultural problems within DWP extend far beyond the assessment system, touching all aspects of its dealings with disabled people in the social security system.

The evidence, compiled over the last decade by DNS and other journalists, academics and activists, shows systemic negligence by DWP, a culture of cover-up and denial, and a refusal to accept that the department has a duty of care to those disabled people claiming support through the social security system.

Much of that evidence has been brought together in a detailed timeline, as part of the Deaths by Welfare project headed by Dr China Mills and supported by Healing Justice Ldn, which works with marginalised and oppressed communities.

*Debbie Abrahams; Johanna Baxter; Damien Egan; Gill German; Amanda Hack; Frank McNally; and David Pinto-Duschinsky

**The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP’s actions and failings, is published by Pluto Press

30 October 2025

 

 

Disabled people warn of ‘severe’ consequences if chancellor removes Motability VAT exemption

Disabled people have warned of “severe” consequences if the chancellor goes ahead with reported plans to remove the Motability car scheme’s VAT exemption in next month’s budget.

Disability News Service (DNS) reported last week how the company that runs the scheme, Motability Operations, had warned that removing the VAT tax break entirely could impose an upfront cost of at least £3,000 on even the cheapest cars it offers.

There is no certainty that the chancellor will go ahead with removing the tax exemption entirely – which was revealed by the Times – and she may abandon the plans completely.

But the minister for social security and disability, Sir Stephen Timms, failed to deny plans to target the VAT exemption when asked by disabled Labour MP Emma Lewell on Monday about potential cuts to the scheme.

Instead, Sir Stephen said again that there would be no changes to personal independence payment until next autumn.

Yesterday, a Reform UK press conference on the party’s plans to slash disability benefits – particularly personal independence payment (PIP) – saw the party target the Motability scheme.

The party’s work and pensions spokesperson in the Commons, Lee Anderson, said the scheme had “got completely out of hand” and was “an absolute scandal”, and he suggested that all those receiving Motability cars should only be able to secure a “blue three-wheeler”*.

He said: “What’s wrong with that? Let’s go back to that.”

Meanwhile, disabled people who rely on Motability to maintain their independence have told DNS this week of the drastic impact that increased costs could have on their ability to afford a car through the scheme, and how this would affect their ability to work, enjoy leisure opportunities, and attend medical appointments.

Julia Dalton, a Motability customer for more than 40 years, relies on an adapted vehicle, which she says has allowed her “to work for over four decades, contribute taxes, and live independently” in east Yorkshire.

As an electric wheelchair-user, she needs a large vehicle with a hoist to lift her wheelchair into the car.

She said: “Without Motability, I could never have afforded a suitable vehicle.

It is not possible for me to use a cheap second-hand car because if it breaks down, I cannot simply use a hire car that is not adapted for my needs.

Without a reliable vehicle I would not have been able to get to work and would likely have lost my job.

This scheme has protected my independence, wellbeing, and ability to contribute”.

She says that advance payments – on top of contributing the enhanced rate mobility component of PIP every month – have risen significantly in recent years.

Her latest vehicle in March cost her £4,000 in an advanced payment as well as £1,500 for essential adaptations.

She said: “I am managing financially, but even I would struggle to pay thousands more on top.

If someone like me is at risk of coming off the scheme, what happens to those with less support?

The consequences are severe: disabled people stuck at home; people losing work because they cannot travel; missed medical appointments; isolation.

Motability is not a luxury. It is a lifeline.”

She added: “If exemptions are removed or costs continue to rise, we risk destroying a system that enables disabled people to live, work, and participate fully in society.

I am deeply grateful for Motability. I want to see it protected for the future, so others can have the same opportunities that I had.”

Emma, from Leicester, told DNS that her Motability wheelchair-accessible vehicle (WAV) – which needed an advance payment of £4,500 – had made “a huge positive difference” to her life, and allowed her to continue to visit her dad after he had a stroke, firstly while he was in hospital, and then at home.

She said: “WAV taxis are expensive and difficult to arrange, and using public transport would have been impossible for me health-wise.

Without that access, he might have declined further or needed residential care.

The scheme has literally kept our family connected and independent.”

She said the knock-on effects of removing the VAT exemption – and the insurance premium tax, which is reportedly also being considered – would “make it even harder for disabled people to stay mobile”.

She said: “The knock-on effects would be huge — more reliance on carers, increased pressure on health and social care services, and greater difficulty getting to appointments or even maintaining social contact and contributions to society.

If the tax relief were removed, I simply wouldn’t be able to afford a vehicle and would be stuck in my house even more.”

Richard, a Motability-user for 30 years, from the West Midlands, told DNS that the scheme was vital as a wheelchair-user living in inaccessible housing, and that he and many others would be forced to leave the scheme because it would become unaffordable if its VAT exemption was removed.

He has a progressive, neurological muscle-wasting condition and uses his Motability car to drive to a pool to swim, which allows him to keep the strength in his shoulders that he needs to pull himself up and down the stairs of his home.

Without the car, he would not be able to use the stairs and would end up in expensive extra care housing or a nursing home.

He said: “Being stuck at home would be very detrimental to my mental health.

It will have similar effects on many, especially those who would have to give up work due to unaffordable initial payments.”

April, who has been a Motability customer for 15 years and lives in Lancashire, said the scheme has allowed her to maintain her independence and job and “gets me to and from my workplace safely and stress free”.

She has a small automatic hatchback which now requires a £1,000 advanced payment, when previously there was no advance payment required.

She said: “I fear these government proposals will make Motability pass these costs on to the scheme users – to the detriment of those struggling on low incomes and those needing larger adapted vehicles.

The scheme must be preserved for those of us that need it to maintain our independence, to work, attend appointments, and to live decently, with dignity and safety.”

Michael Newbold, from Staffordshire, a Motability customer for more than 20 years, said the scheme was “essential” for him and his disabled wife.

He said: “I need a car for appointments and shopping, also for leisure.”

They have already had to cope with the council stopping paying for a personal alarm, and for the insurance on his stairlift.

He said: “It’s like little by little they are taking all the things that make life easier.

Most people, in my opinion, will not be able to afford the VAT rise if they are in a similar position as me.”

Another customer, Phil, told DNS that he and his wife Kath would be “totally screwed” without their Motability vehicle.

They are both disabled, but it is Kath who is the Motability customer as she uses a powerchair following a spinal stroke, so she needs a WAV.

Phil said: “We had to find a £4,000 down payment for our WAV and when it has to go back [at the end of the lease] we’ll have to find the same if not more for the next vehicle.

Adding VAT on top would make it unaffordable for us.”

Without the car, he said, they would be “totally isolated”, and they already both struggle with their mental health.

He said: “I can only believe others in the disabled community will be affected in the same way.

My wife and I are from Bristol and it’s a city with an awful bus service so another reason the Motability scheme is so vital for us.”

*A reference to the Invacar that was provided by the government to disabled people up until the late 1970s, when it was replaced by the Motability scheme

**Motability Foundation, the charity that oversees the car scheme, is a DNS subscriber

30 October 2025

 

 

Disabled people face ‘systemic’ barriers in accessing community equipment, parliamentary inquiry finds

A cross-party group of MPs and peers has called on the government to draw up a national strategy to address the “deeply troubling” and “systemic” barriers that prevent disabled people accessing the equipment they need to live independently.

Hundreds of disabled people and professionals across the UK fed into the inquiry by the all-party parliamentary group for access to disability equipment, which found an “inconsistent” community equipment system that was in crisis due to fragmentation, underinvestment, and a lack of leadership.

The inquiry heard of disabled children missing school because the correct hoists had not arrived; disabled adults unable to live independently and forced out of their jobs because repairs to equipment were taking months; and carers driven to “physical and emotional exhaustion”.

It found too many disabled people faced long delays, unsuitable equipment and “a lack of joined up support” within the system, which provides equipment such as grab rails, hoists, wheelchairs, ramps, specialist mattresses, and assistive technology.

The group’s report includes findings of a survey from more than 600 users of equipment, carers, professionals and equipment-providers.

More than half of equipment-users who took part (55 per cent) said they believed services were worsening.

The same proportion said they did not have access to the equipment they needed.

One equipment-user told the inquiry that the support offered “barely scrapes the barrel of what people actually need to live their everyday lives.”

More than a fifth of those surveyed (22 per cent) said they had waited more than two months to receive their equipment once it had been approved.

The report heard of the experience of Rhys Porter, who has cerebral palsy, and went without essential equipment, including a hoist and home adaptations, for two years.

His parents had to help him use a commode seat in his bedroom and drag him into the family bathroom on a towel once a week.

He was only able to go ahead with vital surgery because the charity Newlife provided him with a portable hoist.

The report calls for a “cohesive” national strategy; funding reform of the current “fragmented” model; action to address lengthy waiting-times for assessments and equipment; improved communication with equipment-users and between local authorities, health bodies, and government departments; a national advisory board with service-user representation; and action to improve reuse and recycling of equipment.

Labour MP Daniel Francis, chair of the all-party group, said: “Across hundreds of testimonies, one message came through loud and clear: the system designed to support disabled children and adults is failing them.

It is failing to deliver equipment on time, failing to provide the right support, and failing to listen to the very people it exists to serve.

Under the current system we’re seeing children missing school, adults being forced out of work and carers injuring themselves.

It’s failing patients, carers, and the sector alike, and it’s high time for the government to get a grip.

Access to community equipment is not privilege, it’s a daily necessity.

We need a national strategy for community equipment and clear leadership and accountability in its delivery.

Ensuring everyone is given the right support at the right time is simply a matter of political will and commitment.”

The Department of Health and Social Care was unable to comment on the report by noon today (Thursday).

30 October 2025

 

 

Regulator’s annual report shows impact of social care crisis on disabled people

An annual report by the care regulator has highlighted how the continuing social care crisis is impacting disabled and older people who need support in their own homes.

The Care Quality Commission said in its annual State of Care report that the health and social care system remained “fragmented and under severe strain”.

It said that demand for local authority-funded support had continued to rise, while the job vacancy rate in adult social care was still three times higher than in the wider employment market.

And it said that more community services were “urgently needed” to support people to stay in their own homes for longer.

The report includes evidence from members of CQC’s Experts by Experience group, which has come from their own experiences of care and support and from talking to other service-users during CQC inspections.

Living in a rural area can particularly affect alternative options if a homecare agency is providing poor care, the report says.

One of the Experts by Experience told CQC: “The only other agency down the road hasn’t got any space for me. Where do you expect me to go?

I’m telling you what’s wrong and the things I’m not happy with, but I don’t feel like I’ve necessarily got a choice to change that.”

CQC’s Experts by Experience said disabled people had told them how they had been “left to sit or lie in soiled or wet clothing for hours while waiting for their care worker to arrive”.

The report says: “As local authorities around the country increasingly look to make savings, it seems likely more will signpost people to support in the community, ration the care they do provide, and reduce the provision of other statutory and non-statutory services.

As well as negatively affecting the health and wellbeing of those in need of social care support, this could increase the pressure on the health and care system and the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector, and further increase the burden on unpaid carers.”

As CQC only began implementing its new single assessment framework in January 2024, it is not possible to directly compare the latest ratings from its inspections with previous years.

Inspections have been focused on services where CQC information suggested people might be at risk.

The ratings produced through the framework for about 3,000 adult social care services (out of a total of about 20,000 services across England) show four per cent were rated inadequate, another 26 per cent were seen as requiring improvement, 67 per cent were rated good, and two per cent were seen as outstanding.

Professor Sir Mike Richards, CQC’s chair, said: “The Casey Commission will be an important step in reforming social care – but it won’t solve the core funding problem.

We continue to call for long-term, sustainable funding for adult social care.”

30 October 2025

 

 

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

Reform UK’s draconian plans to scrap the personal independence payment (PIP) for people with anxiety were last night labelled “cruel, heartless and reprehensible”. At a press conference in London, the party vowed to end PIP for claimants with “non-serious anxiety disorders” and introduce more regular reassessments for those who qualify: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/reform-uks-plans-rip-up-36150700

Journalist and former BBC presenter Mark Mardell was left feeling “humiliated” after he was told he could not board a Turkish Airlines flight due to having Parkinson’s disease and no doctor’s report. The broadcaster was unaware of this requirement and was shocked when he could not board his flight home from Istanbul to Gatwick: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce9dx4zgzjzo

30 October 2025

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

 

Oct 222025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net
The words "We want an Independent PIP Review" in bold and black text, with Independent highlighted in red. On the left there is a tear-out effect of a greyscale photo of a disability protest, and a red-tinted photo of Stephen Timms, the disability minister.
Disability campaign group Disabled People Against the Cuts Cymru pose for a group photo outside the Senedd (Welsh parliament) with Sioned Williams MS. Sioned is holding up the DPAC Cymru letter. There are 15 people in the photo. Two people are wearing DPAC t-shirts. Four people are using wheelchairs. Two people are wearing face-masks. One person is holding a flag showing a Welsh dragon with a disability equality colour background. Behind everyone is the DPAC Cymru banner. It is very large, and has five people holding it. It says Disabled People Against Cuts and then the word Cymru with a Welsh dragon background effect on the text. It has the DPAC logo which is a red, green, purple, blue wheel being held by four arms with different skin tones. At the center of the logo is an upside-down black triangle bearing the letters D P A C and the word Cymru. Behind the campaigners are various tall buildings in Cardiff. The nearest building is made of a striking orange brick.

On Tuesday 14th October, members and supporters of Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) met outside the Senedd (the Welsh Parliament) to protest the disability cuts and hand over a letter to Senedd members. The letter, co-signed by over 700 individuals and organisations, outlined DPAC’s request to the Welsh Government to support an independent review of Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The letter calls for a PIP review that is truly led independently by disabled people and our organisations, to allow our lived experience to influence the policies and decisions that will ultimately affect us.

We are grateful to the members of the Senedd who met with us or wrote to us about this matter, and we hope that all members will take into consideration what the letter said.

The lobby happened on the same day that the Minister for Social Security and Disability, Sir Stephen Timms, declined an invitation to meet with the Senedd Cross Party Group on Disability due to “diary pressures”. Timms is currently responsible for the PIP review, and we feel that his response highlights how disabled people and Disabled People’s Organisations (DPOs) are being excluded from the review and decision-making process.

Timms’ promise that the PIP review would be a genuine co-production with disabled people is not being upheld, and the Senedd lobby was part of an ongoing campaign to ensure that disabled people’s voices are being heard.

As a new member of DPAC Cymru, it was wonderful to see so many people at the Senedd to support what DPAC is working to achieve. Given the current situation, it is vital that disabled people’s voices are amplified in a way that is accessible, impactful, and authentic. We will continue to campaign for the rights of disabled people and to push for a fairer, independent PIP review to create a system that truly supports the needs of disabled people across the UK.

Briallen Symons-East
Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru)

 

Disability campaign group Disabled People Against the Cuts Cymru pose for a group photo outside the Senedd (Welsh parliament) with Sioned Williams MS. Sioned is holding up the DPAC Cymru letter. There are 15 people in the photo. Two people are wearing DPAC t-shirts. Four people are using wheelchairs. Two people are wearing face-masks. One person is holding a flag showing a Welsh dragon with a disability equality colour background. Behind everyone is the DPAC Cymru banner. It is very large, and has five people holding it. It says Disabled People Against Cuts and then the word Cymru with a Welsh dragon background effect on the text. It has the DPAC logo which is a red, green, purple, blue wheel being held by four arms with different skin tones. At the center of the logo is an upside-down black triangle bearing the letters D P A C and the word Cymru. Behind the campaigners are various tall buildings in Cardiff. The nearest building is made of a striking orange brick.

Photo: Disability campaigners from Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru outside the Senedd in Cardiff.

 

A photo of a disability lobby at the Senedd (Welsh parliament). Lee Ellery, who is a wheelchair user, is handing over pack of documents to the Welsh politician Sioned Williams. Lee is smiling and in the middle of talking. In the background is the Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) banner.

Photo: Lee Ellery hands a pack of documents to Sioned Williams MS.

 

Sioned Williams MS talks to campaigners from Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) outside the Senedd. There are about 20 people in shot. Four people are users of powered wheelchairs. One person is wearing a yellow medical face mask and is draped in a Welsh flag with disability equality colours. Another wears a black medical face mask. People are standing around chatting, while Sioned is at the center of the photo. At the right of the photo is the DPAC Cymru banner being held by several people. The banner says "rights not charity." One person wears a hat that says PCS. One has a copy of the Socialist newspaper.

Photo: Lee Ellery hands a pack of documents to Sioned Williams MS – from another angle!

 

Disability campaigners from Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru at the Senedd (Welsh Parliament) talk with the politician Jenny Rathbone MS.

Photo: DPAC Cymru talk with Jenny Rathbone MS outside the Senedd.

 

Disability campaigners Lee Ellery and Joshua Reeves, who are both wheelchair-users, are conversing. Around them are other campaigners from Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru.

Photo: Disability campaigners Lee Ellery and Joshua Reeves BEM conversing.

 

Lee Ellery, Ben Golightly, John Williams from Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru are talking to Sioned Williams MS. In the background is the Senedd building. Lee is using a powered wheelchair. He is wearing smart clothes. Sioned is holding a pack of documents and smiling and looking at Lee attentively. Ben is wearing a DPAC t-shirt and is holding a small placard with text. John is holding a copy of the Socialist newspaper and looking at Ben.

Photo: disability campaigners converse with Sioned Williams MS.

 

Darren Millar MS and staff converse with disability campaigners outside the Senedd. In the background are trees and the sea. It is picturesque, although overcast.

Photo: DPAC Cymru spoke with Darren Millar MS and his staff outside the Senedd.

 

Lee Ellery and Ben Golightly from Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) pose for a photo with Sioned Williams. Lee Ellery is a wheelchair user and is in smart clothes. Ben is wearing a DPAC t-shirt. Ben is holding a sheet of paper with the DPAC Cymru logo that says "No disability cuts! Disabled people want to run our own independent PIP review!" Sioned is holding a sheet of paper with the same message translated into Welsh. She is also holding up the DPAC Cymru letter with 700 signatures. In the background, John Williams is standing to their leftwith a copy of a newspaper called the Socialist. On the cover of the newspaper, it says: "Your party: let's build a party to fight labour's war and austerity. defend the right to protest."

Photo: We posed for photos with Sioned Williams MS holding bilingual (English and Welsh) signs that said:
“No disability cuts! Disabled people want to run our own independent PIP review!”

Oct 092025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Contents

Tory trio mislead party conference on disability benefits as they stir up hostility towards disabled claimants 1

Government ‘has lost its way’ on accessible housing, after new towns report ignores disabled people 3

Alarm over government’s choices to lead ‘over-diagnosis’ review that could help ministers cut benefits 5

Coach firm to pay thousands to accessible transport activist after driver lied that he threatened violence 8

Access to Work dossier of evidence shows ‘real harm’ and job losses caused by DWP cuts and failings 10

Greens show contrast with other major parties on disability cuts and refusal to stir up hostility to claimants 13

New film celebrates 10 years since ‘moment in time’ victory over care charges in London borough 14

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week 16

 

 

Tory trio mislead party conference on disability benefits as they stir up hostility towards disabled claimants

A trio of leading Tories have used misleading and offensive statements at their annual conference in Manchester to scapegoat disabled people who rely on support from the benefits system and whip up hostility towards them.

The Conservative party made it clear this week that it would go further and faster than the Labour government in cutting disability benefits, and said it would cut £23 billion from social security spending if it won back power.

Some of these savings would be used to pay for the abolition of stamp duty on residential property sales*, which would only benefit the better-off.

The most offensive line may have come from Tory leader Kemi Badenoch, who told the conference yesterday (Wednesday): “I stand for a society where… the vulnerable are supported, but where freeloaders are told where to get off.”

She said a Conservative government would “restrict benefits to those with more severe mental health conditions, not anxiety or mild depression”**.

Disability News Service (DNS) reminded the party this week how government-funded research found that when a Conservative-led government tried to slash the number of people on out-of-work disability benefits and force them into work in the post-2010 austerity years, it led to 590 suicides in three years.

The party had not responded to these concerns by 11am today (Thursday).

Badenoch also told the conference that “after Covid, 2,000 people a day were being signed onto out-of-work sickness benefits”, which she said was “a national tragedy”.

There was no suggestion in the former engineer’s speech that she had connected the impact of a deadly and disabling pandemic with this increase in the number of people being unable to work due to sickness or disability.

Badenoch also appeared to suggest that she supported allowing disability hate speech to pass unpunished, telling Tory members: “I stand for a society where free speech trumps hurt feelings.”

Mel Stride, the former work and pensions secretary and now his party’s shadow chancellor, had spoken earlier in the week of the “spiralling welfare bill”.

DNS has now told the party’s press office on at least three occasions that figures from the Office for Budget Responsibility*** show clearly that social security spending as a proportion of GDP**** is predicted to remain at or close to 11.1 per cent for the next five years, and that it is lower than it was in 2015-16.

Again, the party had not responded to these concerns about Stride’s misleading comment by 11am today.

The party also announced plans to prevent anyone other than British citizens from receiving social security support, if it regains power.

It appears that this would apply to disabled people with significant support needs and those who have legally worked in the country for years through “indefinite leave to remain”.

The third shadow minister to mislead the conference on cuts to disability benefits was shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately.

She told Tory members: “Millions are getting benefits for anxiety and ADHD, along with a free Motability car.”

A disabled person can only qualify to join the Motability scheme if they receive the enhanced mobility component of personal independence payment (PIP) or similar benefits.

In fact, DWP figures showas highlighted by the Benefits and Work website – that only about 190,000 PIP claimants have ADD, ADHD, anxiety or anxiety-related conditions as their “main disabling condition” and receive an enhanced mobility component.

And many of this group will not have exchanged their PIP mobility component for a Motability vehicle.

It is possible that Whately was referring to all those disabled people with anxiety and ADHD who have a Motability vehicle (ie including those with a different main disabling condition in addition to a mental health condition or being neurodivergent), but – if so – her statement was still highly misleading.

And even if that had been her intention, Motability Operations, the company that runs the scheme, says it has only a total of 860,000 customers, and many of those use their allowance to hire a powered wheelchair or mobility scooter.

Whately’s comments also suggest that PIP claimants receive a “free” car in addition to that benefit, when in fact a claimant usually has to exchange all their mobility allowance to lease a Motability vehicle, and must also often make a non-refundable advance payment.

Once again, the Conservative party had refused to comment by 11am today on Whately’s figures.

*It is believed this would apply to primary residences in England and Northern Ireland

**Although she said she wanted to “restrict benefits”, it is unlikely that she meant that people with anxiety or “mild” depression would be prevented from accessing mainstream benefits such as the standard universal credit allowance

***See chapter five of OBR’s Economic and Fiscal Outlook – October 2024, chart 5.2

****Gross domestic product, the size of the country’s economy in a particular year

9 October 2025

 

 

Government ‘has lost its way’ on accessible housing, after new towns report ignores disabled people

The government has been accused of losing its way on accessible housing, after refusing to explain why a report by its “taskforce” on delivering a series of new towns across England does not include a single mention of disabled people.

The independent report – commissioned by the government – recommends 12 potential locations for new towns across England, with at least 10,000 new homes in each location.

But the 135-page report contains only two brief references to the need for accessibility, either with the new homes themselves or the built environment surrounding them, and there is no mention of working-age disabled people.

One reference in the report says new towns should “include homes for older people, as well as specialist housing built to accessible and adaptable standards”.

The other says the mix of homes in new towns should include “homes for market sale, private rent, affordable housing, and specialist accommodation for students, families, and older people, all within a single coherent masterplan”.

Disabled people’s organisations that have been campaigning for action to solve the accessible housing crisis were critical of the latest failure by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG).

Mikey Erhardt, policy lead for Disability Rights UK, said: “It is unacceptable that, in 2025, a plan to deliver thousands of new homes, to tackle the housing crisis, will do nothing to improve the lives of disabled people.

Relegating the needs of millions to a classification as ‘specialist’ shows just how entrenched ableist views are within the department.

What is specialist about creating places that millions can actually call home, instead of the less than 10 per cent that disabled people can currently even visit?

Yet again, we see a government department that has lost its way in trying to triangulate policy in favour of big developers and landlords, with disabled people as ever missing out.

Talk about a missed opportunity; they’ve not even chosen to commit to a minimum number of accessible or wheelchair-accessible homes, let alone ensuring DDPOs* are included in the planning process.

If our newest towns can’t be accessible, which ones will be?”

Last week, housing secretary Steve Reed announced that the government would build 12 of the new towns across England, but he and his party failed to make any pledge that accessibility would be central to their design.

More than 15 months after the general election, disabled people are still waiting for the new government to say whether it will introduce stricter minimum accessibility standards for new-build homes in England, three years after a pledge by the last Conservative government – which was never fulfilled – to take action to address the critical shortage of accessible housing.

Laura Vicinanza, senior policy and stakeholder engagement manager for Inclusion London, said: “The taskforce talks about accessible ‘specialist housing’, but accessible and adaptable standards must apply to all housing, so we’re not cut off from our communities.

Housing with a baseline level of accessibility benefits us all – it allows us to stay in our homes longer as our needs change and we age.

Three years ago, the Conservative government committed to raise the minimum accessibility standards for all new-build housing to the M4(2) accessible and adaptable standard, but they didn’t follow through.

It’s time for Labour to commit to M4(2) accessibility for all new-builds, and for 10 per cent of new housing to be M4(3) wheelchair-accessible, focused in social housing.

This is the opportunity to ensure that this wave of new housing and new towns doesn’t lock us out of safe housing for another generation.”

This week, Disability News Service (DNS) asked the government why the taskforce and its report had almost completely ignored disabled people’s housing needs, and the opportunity to build in accessibility across the new towns from the beginning; and why there was nothing in the taskforce report that sets a minimum level of accessible homes, including how many wheelchair-accessible homes should be built in the new towns.

DNS also asked for reassurance for disabled people that the government’s new towns plans would build in accessibility right from the start and from the ground-up, in co-production with disabled people and their user-led organisations.

MHCLG declined to explain why the taskforce report contained so few references to accessible housing and built environment in the new towns and failed to mention disabled people.

And it once again said it would set out its policies on accessible new-build housing shortly.

At last year’s Labour party conference, in September 2024, after DNS questioned the party on the failure of ministers to mention the accessible housing crisis, a Labour spokesperson promised the government would “set out its policies on accessible new build housing shortly”.

An MHCLG spokesperson said in a statement this week: “Everyone deserves to live in a decent home that is suitable for them and meets their needs.

We will create New Towns that work for everyone, including disabled people, and we welcome recommendations from the taskforce that they should include specialist housing built to accessible and adaptable standards.

We’re committed to working with disabled people and their organisations to shape these new communities together.”

*Deaf and disabled people’s organisations

9 October 2025

 

 

Alarm over government’s choices to lead ‘over-diagnosis’ review that could help ministers cut benefits

The government’s decision to commission a review of alleged “over-diagnosis” of mental health conditions and neurodivergence has caused alarm among many disabled people, with fears that it will allow ministers to justify further sweeping cuts to disability benefits.

There is also concern that health and social care secretary Wes Streeting has commissioned two high-profile mental health figures with controversial backgrounds to lead the review.

Although the government has not yet confirmed the review will take place, it will reportedly examine the prevalence of mental illness and neurodivergence, “with a particular focus on whether some conditions are being overdiagnosed”.

But disabled activists believe its authors have been chosen because they will “help to slash the social security bill”.

The review will apparently be chaired by Professor Peter Fonagy, while the vice-chair will be Professor Sir Simon Wessely.

Fonagy is a highly-decorated clinical psychologist and psychoanalyst but he has also been closely associated with the Serenity Integrated Mentoring (SIM) programme, which was described as unethical, unlawful and unsafe and “a national scandal” that had put people in severe mental distress at risk of being denied vital support.

He was lead author of an article (PDF) whose co-authors included Paul Jennings, the former police officer who founded SIM, and which examined how SIM was working in London and concluded six years ago that it was “promising”.

Jennings described Fonagy in one presentation as a “senior supporter” of the programme.

Campaigning by the StopSIM Coalition later exposed SIM as discriminatory, coercive and punitive, and eventually persuaded NHS England to admit it was wrong to endorse SIM without applying “sufficient scrutiny” and to accept that this had harmed service-users.

Wessely’s appointment is likely to prove even more divisive.

He helped recruit patients onto the notorious, and later discredited, PACE trial – part-funded by the Department for Work and Pensions – and he was hugely supportive of the PACE research (PDF) into the use of controversial treatments such as cognitive behaviour therapy and graded exercise therapy for those with ME.

In 1993 (PDF, page 17)*, Wessely had written to the then Department of Social Security to argue that the only difference between “chronic fatigue syndrome, or ME as it is sometimes known” and “the major psychiatric disorders” was “the existence of a powerful lobby group that dislikes any association with psychiatry”.

Wessely argued in his letter that any suggestion that ME was a neurological condition would “discourage any sensible efforts at rehabilitation” and lead to an “ever increasing stream of claims for permanent benefits in people who might otherwise have had a chance of recovery”.

The view – shared by Wessely – that it was the attitudes of people with ME that were preventing their recovery, and the impact of this belief among many doctors and scientists on the treatment of many thousands of people with ME, was described by the Guardian’s George Monbiot last year as “the greatest medical scandal of the 21st century”.

Wessely also led a review of the Mental Health Act, which was criticised for falling “significantly short” of recommending full human rights for people in mental distress, but was a blueprint for Labour’s much-criticised mental health bill.

Although the Fonagy review has yet to be officially confirmed by the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), its existence was revealed by the well-connected Health Service Journal (HSJ).

Linda Burnip, co-founder of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC), said: “I think the choice of these two people shows how little regard the government, and Streeting and Timms** in particular, have for the fears of disabled people.

It seems likely that they have deliberately been chosen to help to slash the social security bill.”

The grassroots, user-led mental health group Recovery in the Bin (RiTB) said both appointments were “safe establishment” figures with troubling backgrounds, such as Wessely’s links to the ME “forced exercise programmes” and Fonagy’s links to SIM, which suggested “a very low probability that this will be an open and fair investigation”.

RiTB said: “We expect it will return findings the government will find useful to deny people benefits.

The issue that should be investigated is the thousands of deaths covered up by the DWP.

Instead, they want to cause more death.”

A spokesperson for DPAC Cymru said it was “alarmed” at the decision to appoint Fonagy and Wessely, whose backgrounds were “a clear signal” of a “politically-motivated review that has had its outcome decided in advance.

In the context of an NHS starved of funding, disability welfare cuts, and the UK government’s demonisation of disabled people, it is obvious why these two men have been selected.”

A DPAC Cymru member added: “Normalising mental health and neurodiversity normalises seeking help and clarity which makes diagnosis more accessible.

We’ve always existed, we’ve always been different, we just didn’t have the ability to seek help or diagnosis.

This whole ‘autism is new’ and ‘over-diagnosed’ argument is just another load of rubbish to demonise young people, make disability a taboo, exclude disabled communities, and save rich people pennies on providing help to people who really need it, and it frustrates me so incredibly much.”

Bethan Edwards, co-founder of the Stop SIM Coalition, which has now been disbanded, told Disability News Service (DNS) this week: “Professor Fonagy led an evaluation of SIM during its implementation in London in 2018 and 2019. 

SIM involved withholding care from people in extreme mental distress and involved the threat of criminalisation for attempting to use statutory services to meet significant mental health needs. 

It should not have taken a group of service-users to bring this to the public and professional bodies’ attention in 2021, leading to SIM’s demise. 

The alarm could and should have been raised sooner, including by Professor Fonagy himself. 

I, therefore, have very little confidence that the DHSC’s review will put the well-being and safety of people with mental health needs ahead of the Labour governments agenda – to cut welfare spending and to continue underfunding mental health services.”

And Kate Skinner, a neurodivergent campaigner, psychology student and academic research assistant, told DNS: “In my mind, the government’s potential reasons behind this review are straightforward: if fewer people qualify for diagnostic labels (such as ADHD), then fewer people will qualify for benefits, accommodations, and specialist services, as so many places lock the provision of support behind these labels.

Reviews like this one feel like their real purpose is redefining who counts as being ‘deserving’ of support, as evidenced by the wider media, which has been chipping away at the ‘validity’ and ‘deservingness’ of neurodivergence for a while now.”

She said: “I understand why many disabled people, particularly those who are neurodivergent, are deeply concerned about this review.

Psychology and psychiatry have a long history of researchers deciding what is ‘best’ for others, while ignoring the lived experiences of the people they study.

This history of exclusion and paternalism already makes it difficult to trust that this new review, commissioned in such a negative light, will be conducted with genuine openness or ethical integrity.”

Skinner added: “One of the professionals leading this review [Wessely] has previously argued that greater awareness of mental health conditions may not be ‘beneficial’, and has warned against ‘over-professionalising’ or ‘medicalising’ certain conditions.

Therefore, it is difficult not to feel that the government is seeking to use ‘experts’ to push through a harmful, ideologically-driven agenda.

Until reviews like this are shaped and conducted by those they claim to represent, any talk of ‘overdiagnosis’ will continue to sound less like healthy, scientific investigation and more like deep, cynical suspicion.”

DHSC declined to comment on the HSJ article.

*This document was obtained from the National Archives through the efforts of disabled barrister Valerie Eliot Smith, who has ME

**Sir Stephen Timms, minister for social security and disability

9 October 2025

 

 

Coach firm to pay thousands to accessible transport activist after driver lied that he threatened violence

A coach operator that passed on defamatory lies about a well-known disabled activist who exposed the inaccessibility of one of its coaches will have to pay him substantial damages, and make a humiliating apology in open court.

A driver for Bolton-based Tyrers Coaches fabricated claims about Doug Paulley, alleging he had threatened a Network Rail coordinator with violence and that he hurled swearwords at him over an access failure at Rochdale train station 13 months ago.

Tyrers had passed on the allegations to the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA), and another transport company, Arriva.

The incident occurred after Tyrers – which was one of the companies providing a rail replacement service on behalf of government-owned Northern Trains – had been unable to accept Paulley onto its vehicle because the relevant door was not working.

Coaches from two other companies were also not able to accept Paulley on board, with one driver not trained to operate the accessibility equipment, and the other vehicle not wheelchair-accessible.

Tyrers later told DVSA and another transport company, Arriva, that Paulley had threatened violence, was physically threatening, called its driver “a d**khead” and told him he didn’t know what he was “f***ing doing”.

Paulley later discovered by accident – when his solicitor submitted a subject access request to DVSA in connection with another discrimination case – what Tyrers had said about him.

The coach company was unaware that Paulley – who has spent years exposing access failures across the transport industry – had recorded the incident on a camera attached to his wheelchair.

He was able to use the recording to show that none of the claims made by the Tyrers driver had been true.

He decided to launch a defamation claim in the high court because of the risk of serious damage to his reputation, and – he told Disability News Service – because he wanted to address the “reprehensible”, discriminatory and dishonest behaviour of transport companies and coach drivers, and their “horrific, hateful, ableist behaviour”.

Tyrers has now agreed to pay him £7,500 in damages and a further £1,000 for a breach of data protection law.

The company will also have to write to DVSA and Arriva, making it clear that the allegations it shared were false.

And it will have to apologise in open court for the false claims it made, and for the distress and damage caused to Paulley’s reputation.

Tyrers had not commented on its actions by 11am today (Thursday).

Train company Northern has also apologised to Paulley, after one of its managers claimed in an email that he “goes around Railway Stations and tries to find fault at each location”.

The email had been sent out after Paulley complained about the Rochdale incident, in which he had been “simply trying to travel and encountered genuine accessibility barriers” with the rail replacement bus service.

He told Northern in a complaint: “When I documented these experiences, it was as part of my legitimate role as a nationally recognised transport accessibility advocate, not as malicious troublemaking.

The suggestion that I ‘go around’ railway stations looking for problems fundamentally misrepresents evidence-based documentation of accessibility failures as some form of personal vendetta.”

He said the language used showed “a concerning institutional prejudice against disabled passengers who exercise their legal rights to document accessibility failures and hold operators accountable”.

And he said it had “contributed to the toxic atmosphere” that enabled the discriminatory behaviour by Tyrers, and the subsequent “inaccurate, defamatory allegations” that were made about him.

Paulley said Northern’s actions had created “chilling effects that may deter other disabled passengers from reporting legitimate concerns”.

Northern has now apologised in an email for the distress caused by its manager’s comments and told Paulley his campaigning was “invaluable” and “helps us learn from our mistakes” and that his work over the years “has been greatly appreciated and has played an important role in helping us improve”.

Paulley’s data protection case against another transport company is ongoing.

A Northern spokesperson said the company had no further updates to the apology issued to Doug Paulley.

But he added: “As referenced [in the emailed apology], the work that campaigners including Mr Paulley do is invaluable.

The comments in the email about which the complaint was received are not reflective of Northern’s views, and we are truly sorry for any distress caused by these comments.”

9 October 2025

 

 

Access to Work dossier of evidence shows ‘real harm’ and job losses caused by DWP cuts and failings

The Access to Work scheme is failing Deaf and disabled people, and its “decline” in the last two years has caused them “real harm”, with some support packages cut by 80 per cent, according to a detailed dossier of evidence prepared by a user-led organisation.

The 33-page report was put together by London-based Action on Disability (AoD), which said its evidence shows “systemic administrative failure, lack of transparency, and potential breaches of equality and human rights obligations” by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). 

The evidence has been sent to the National Audit Office (NAO) as part of its ongoing investigation into how DWP is addressing “challenges” in the operation of the Access to Work (AtW) scheme.

NAO launched its investigation earlier this year following concerns that increased demand for AtW support, and other factors, had “adversely affected DWP’s administration of the scheme”, with “growing backlogs of people waiting for their applications to be processed or their claims to be paid”.

Much of the AoD report is based on its experience assisting disabled people with their AtW applications, renewals and appeals, in which their awards were “reduced, delayed, or rendered unusable due to unimplementable conditions”.

Between January 2023 and July 2025, it says, average support hours per week for more than 35 work placements it monitored have fallen from 22.5 to just four, while the average waiting time for an AtW case manager to be allocated has risen from eight weeks to 30, the job retention rate has halved from 88 per cent to 43 per cent, and the progression to paid work for those on supported internships has fallen from 72 per cent to 28 per cent.

Employers working with AoD say the deterioration of the scheme since 2023 has led to “job losses, reduced hours, and withdrawal from inclusion programmes that were previously successful”, with a significant decline in confidence in AtW among employers.

The dossier was shared with Disability News Service (DNS) this week, just days after DNS reported how disability minister Sir Stephen Timms admitted signing off on a directive that led to widespread cuts to disabled people’s AtW support packages.

Sir Stephen admitted to DNS last week that he had signed off on an order for AtW staff to apply guidance more “scrupulously”, after civil servants submitted a “proposal” to him to approve.

Among its concerns, the AoD report says changes to the way the scheme operates have made it harder for disabled people to contact their AtW case manager, while leading to inconsistency around quotations, inconsistent decision-making, and delayed or unclear pathways for appeals.

The effect of the changes has been to exclude disabled people from employment, destabilise supported internships, and undermine employers’ commitment to inclusion.

This has left AtW no longer operating “as a transparent, accountable, or lawfully administered scheme”, says the report.

The impact of changes over the last two years has been “a significant reduction in awards, increased administrative delays, and a breakdown of communication between AtW and service users, reversing years of progress in inclusive employment”.

And it says its evidence suggests that DWP has refused to publish internal policy instructions; denied claimants procedural fairness; obstructed transparency; and failed to ensure economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in public spending.

The report particularly highlights what AoD calls a “systemic policy shift”, with many applications that would previously have been awarded 100 per cent of a disabled person’s support needs in the workplace now being awarded about 20 per cent of their assessed needs.

This occurs when AtW categorises the assistance requested as a “job aide”, meaning the support worker is viewed as performing part of the job on the claimant’s behalf, rather than helping the disabled employee to overcome barriers related to the work.

AoD says AtW’s “rigid” approach fails to recognise the “legitimate” support that many disabled people need to complete their work independently, such as prompting and structured guidance.

It says AtW’s lack of recognition of such an approach to support has led to significant funding reductions of up to 80 per cent, disproportionately affecting people with learning difficulties, autistic people, those with acquired brain injury, or people with sensory processing impairments.

The report says the 20 per cent award policy “is like handing someone a plank that only stretches a fifth of the way across a river and then blaming them when they fall in”.

The NAO said its report was likely to be published early next year, and its team was still “gathering evidence through different methods”.

A government consultation on the future of Access to Work closed on 30 June, and DWP says it is now reviewing those responses and the scheme and working with disabled people and others on its proposals.

A “collaboration committee” on Access to Work – whose members have remained anonymous – concluded its work this month, and DWP says its views and concerns will now help shape the department’s policymaking.

DWP continues to insist that no changes have been made to AtW policy.

David Buxton, chief executive of AoD, said: “Access to Work should be a bridge into employment.

Instead, thousands are being left stranded mid-way.

The scheme’s decline is costing jobs, damaging wellbeing, and wasting public money.

We hope the NAO’s inquiry restores transparency, fairness, and trust.”

A DWP spokesperson said: “We inherited an Access to Work scheme that is failing both employees and employers, which is why – as part of our welfare reform – we consulted on how it could be improved.

We are reviewing all aspects of the scheme and will develop future policy with disabled people and the organisations that represent them.”

Meanwhile, disability consultant Alice Hastie, who specialises in providing AtW advice, warned this week that DWP had now shut down the AtW complaints email address, which she said “seems like a bizarre (and barely legal!) way of reducing the number of complaints they have to deal with”.

DWP said last night (Wednesday) that its policy is that email is not a valid contact method for complaints unless this has been agreed as a reasonable adjustment.

It is believed that the complaints email may have been shut down because it was for internal use only and its existence was not supposed to have been leaked to claimants.

9 October 2025

 

 

Greens show contrast with other major parties on disability cuts and refusal to stir up hostility to claimants

The Green Party is set to continue to contrast its policy approach on disability with other political parties by supporting disabled people who rely on benefits and have already experienced years of austerity cuts.

The newly-elected leader of the Green Party of England and Wales, Zach Polanski, told members at their annual conference in Bournemouth that the party would fight for the many disabled people “who have found themselves at the sharp end of brutal government cuts”.

His speech was focused on reducing the cost-of-living and addressing “rip-off Britain”, demanding more from “the very wealthiest”, tackling climate breakdown, attacking the “alarm bells of authoritarianism” within the Labour government, supporting the NHS and community cohesion, protecting “rights” and “liberties” through a “politics of hope”, and supporting migrants.

But there was almost no mention of how the party would fulfil these pledges, other than a repeated emphasis on wealth taxes, although its general election manifesto last year pledged a five per cent increase in the level of disability benefits, free personal care for adults, and more money to support disabled children in mainstream schools.

The difference in emphasis from the Liberal Democrat conference – where party leader Ed Davey spoke in an interview of targeting disability benefit fraud – and particularly the Labour, Reform and Conservative party conferences (see separate story), was clear.

There were no attacks on disabled people claiming benefits in Polanksi’s speech, and no calls for cuts to spending on supporting disabled people, or complaints about the “over-diagnosis” of mental distress or neurodivergence.

Instead, he said his party would fight for hard-pressed families, renters who live in “shoddy accommodation” and are wary of further rent increases, and “thousands and thousands of disabled people in the UK who have found themselves at the sharp end of brutal government cuts”.

In his speech, Polanski mentioned meeting a disabled man and his carer while knocking on doors with another Green politician, and how they spoke about “how hard everything is and how it just didn’t feel like a single person was representing them”.

Despite his words, there was still no clear picture of what Polanski and the Green Party would do to change that, other than “focusing day-in, day-out on the cost of living”.

One of the party’s co-deputy leaders, Rachel Millward, had told the conference of her experience of physical impairment and associated “horrendous” pain in her 20s, when she had a blue parking badge and an adapted vehicle.

But she said: “Far worse than that was the pain of separation from my community and from nature.

Conference, please let us always make it a priority to find ways to give people with disabilities much better access to both.”

The contrast with the four main UK-wide parties continued this week, when the Green Party’s other co-deputy leader, Mothin Ali, attacked the “divisiveness and hatred” of the Conservative party and its announcements at its conference in Manchester this week (see separate story).

He said: “The package so far – turbo-charged welfare cuts, draconian anti-migration measures, and axing life-saving foreign aid – would leave few but the wealthiest unscathed.

These measures are a cruel attack on the sick and disabled, migrants and asylum-seekers, and some of the poorest communities in the world.”

9 October 2025

 

 

New film celebrates 10 years since ‘moment in time’ victory over care charges in London borough

A new film released to celebrate 10 years since activists won a campaign to stop their local council charging for care shows how disabled people can achieve important victories by taking collective action, say campaigners who fought for that success.

The film* highlights the eight years of campaigning by Hammersmith and Fulham Coalition against Cuts (HAFCAC), which led eventually to their London borough scrapping home care charges in April 2015.

The campaign began in 2006 when the new Conservative-led council introduced a policy that imposed charges for home care.

HAFCAC was set up to fight the “discriminatory policy”, and it spent eight years lobbying councillors, holding protests and pushing the council to change its policy.

Tara Flood, one of the HAFCAC steering group members, says in the film: “There’s something particularly awful about receiving, through the post or via email, a document, an invoice, that sets out how much you have to pay to enable you to live at home with the support that you need to participate in your community, to be a friend, to be a family member, to be a parent, to get to work.

No-one else is experiencing that.”

HAFCAC also backed a judicial review legal action against the charges brought by three disabled people from the borough who received home care.

Although they lost the case, one of the high court judges described the policy as sacrificing home care services on the altar of council tax reductions.

The film describes how the coalition raised much of its funding with pub quizzes, at which disabled activists such as Flood, Kevin Caulfield and Debbie Domb – all members of HAFCAC’s steering group – began to build relationships with politicians, including Labour’s Steve Cowan.

Cowan, who would go on to lead Hammersmith and Fulham council, says in the film: “The crucial thing was what Debbie, Tara and Kevin were able to do, was educate me and my colleagues on the need for the social model of disability to be right at the heart of our Labour administration’s approach.”

Months after Labour won back control of the council in May 2014, Cowan announced that Hammersmith and Fulham would be scrapping all home care charges in May 2015.

It remains one of only two councils in England that do not charge for home care, after Tower Hamlets council in east London scrapped adult home care charges from April this year.

Caulfield says in the film: “That moment [in 2014] was a real moment in time to show that campaigning does work, that disabled people getting together and collectively taking action can really have an impact.”

David Webb, a fourth member of the HAFCAC steering group, who ran the fund-raising pub quizzes, describes in the film how having personal assistance has completely changed his life.

He says: “It has given me a measure of choice and control that I didn’t have before.”

Victoria Brignall, who has benefited from scrapping care charges in the borough, says in the film: “People don’t choose to be disabled.

It’s a tax on disability and we would like disabled people to be treated in the same way as other people.

You don’t charge people to send their children to school, or to use parks, or to collect your rubbish, so why charge disabled people for their care?”

She says she hopes other councils will now be inspired to abolish home care charges.

Last year, Disability Law Service published research which showed that disabled people across England were continuing to face unlawful discrimination and inequality on an “unparalleled” scale due to “unjust” social care charging policies.

Caulfield points out in the film that tens of thousands of disabled people every year are taken to court for non-payment of care charges.

That’s just a disgrace,” he says.

He and his fellow HAFCAC veterans say the film serves as both a celebration and a rallying cry, and that they hope their success “will inspire more disabled people to take action”.

The film, launched on Tuesday, is dedicated to Debbie Domb, “a fearless freedom fighter for disabled people’s rights”, who died in 2018.

*The film, ‘£12.40 an Hour for a Shower: The Story of Disabled People’s Struggle to Abolish Home Care Charging in Hammersmith & Fulham’, was directed, edited and produced by disabled film-maker, journalist and author Richard Butchins, and can be accessed with BSL and subtitles only, or with added audio description.

**Inclusion London is campaigning to persuade the government to scrap all social care charges.

9 October 2025

 

 

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

Thousands of sick or disabled people will be helped into work through a major push to place job advisers in GP surgeries, the DWP has claimed. Work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden is announcing a £167.2 million expansion of the Connect to Work programme to nine further areas across England, including Cumbria, Oxfordshire, and West Sussex and Brighton: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/dwp-change-affect-gp-surgeries-36033854

Jobcentre work coaches say they are struggling to find employers who can accommodate disabled people and get them into work. The BBC spoke to two work coaches, who said opportunities are hardest to come by for those with long-term health conditions who may require a level of flexibility or additional support. It comes as new data obtained by the BBC from the Department for Work and Pensions suggests that the number of jobseekers finding work each month is falling: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gz9njvj43o

9 October 2025

 

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

Oct 082025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

4pm to 4.15pm

Tuesday 14th October

Outside the Senedd (Welsh Parliament) in Cardiff

 

The words "We want an Independent PIP Review" in bold and black text, with Independent highlighted in red. On the left there is a tear-out effect of a greyscale photo of a disability protest, and a red-tinted photo of Stephen Timms, the disability minister.

The Disability Minister Stephen Timms was forced to promise UK parliament that there would be no more PIP disability cuts until a review had been co-produced with disabled people.

He has broken this promise.

Disabled people want to run our own, independent, and democratic PIP review.

Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) will be handing in our open letter with 700 signatures from individuals and organisations. We are calling on the Welsh government to do its part and practically support Disabled People’s Organisations to carry out the review.

Placards, in English and Welsh, with the Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru logo, will say:

“No disability cuts! Disabled people want to run our own independent PIP review. We’re asking the Welsh Government to do its part!”

 

If you are able to, would you consider…

Joining us at the lobby in person on Tuesday 14th.

This will involve: being outside for 15 minutes with placards and possibly a megaphone.

Ask your Senedd member to meet us there.

Let people knowour Google Drive has bilingual social media graphics and placard text, as well as alt text for social media graphics accessibility.

We welcome all support!

 

Access requirements

Is there anything that would help you take part? Is there anything we can do better? Do you have any access requirements? Let us know! Email <dpac.cymru@gmail.com>

A limited number of PPE masks will be available for free.

 

 

Social media graphics

This is a graphic advertising a protest. The top half of the image is a picture of the Welsh Government building (the Senedd) with a blue tint, and the bottom half is a ripped paper effect. Text on the top half, in big letters, says: “Protest (Senedd Disability Lobby)”. On the bottom half, text says: “We will be handing in 30 pages of signatures. No disability cuts! Disabled people want to run our own, independent, PIP review.” In bold, it says “We’re asking the Welsh Government to do its part. Tuesday 14th October 2025.” Next to a red map pin, it says: “Cardiff, outside the Senedd, 4pm to 4:15pm”. To the right is the Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru logo, which is a red, pink, blue, green wheel being held by four hands of different skin tones. At the center of the logo is an upside-down black triangle bearing the letters D P A C and the word Cymru.
A graphic of the DPAC Cymru logo. There is the main DPAC logo to the left, which is a red, pink, blue, and green circle being held by four hands of different skin tones, with the words "disabled people against cuts" surrounding it, and an upside-down black traingle in the middle bearing the letters D P A C. On the right is the word Cymru (pronounced cum ree) (C Y M R U) in large letters, and the background of the letters are cutouts of the Welsh flag. Above Cymru (pronounced cum ree) is written the words Disabled People Against Cuts. Below Cymru (pronounced cum ree) are the words Rights, not charity, and the equivilant phrase translated into the Welsh language.
Oct 022025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Contents

Minister admits signing off on order that led to widespread cuts to Access to Work 1

All the evidence from Labour conference points in one direction: More cuts to disability benefits 2

DWP paid nearly £90,000 to disabled claimant left homeless and at risk of harm after years of errors 6

Disability minister struggles to point to any significant achievements in his first year in post 8

Labour ignores disabled people and accessible housing crisis – again – as it announces plans for new towns 10

Labour uses conference to sideline disabled people… unless they are working 11

Labour’s attacks on rights ‘have led to massive resurgence’ in disability movement, protest hears 12

Minister asks DWP to consider releasing secret reports on deaths to grieving relatives 15

No 10 meeting sees Labour hold out olive branch to disabled activists after breakdown of trust over cuts 17

Activist tells conference meeting: Hostile rhetoric under Labour has left me feeling hounded and unsafe 19

Disability Labour priced out of conference after cash-strapped party withdraws financial support 20

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week 23

 

 

Minister admits signing off on order that led to widespread cuts to Access to Work

The disability minister has admitted signing off on orders that have led to widespread cuts to disabled people’s Access to Work support packages since Labour came to power.

Disabled campaigners have been warning for more than a year of DWP cuts and inconsistent decisions on their Access to Work (AtW) claims, while there have also been mounting concerns about lengthening waiting-lists for decisions on claims.

But when social security and disability minister Sir Stephen Timms was challenged by an MP on the apparent cuts earlier this summer, he insisted that no changes had been made to Access to Work policy, although work was “underway to improve Scheme decision-making by applying the guidance with greater consistency”.

He still insists that ministers have made no changes to AtW policy.

But Sir Stephen has admitted to Disability News Service (DNS) that he signed off on an order for Access to Work (AtW) staff to apply the guidance more “scrupulously”, after being presented with a “proposal” from civil servants which they submitted to him to approve.

The confusion over who was responsible for the move began when DNS asked him who in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) had asked AtW civil servants to carry out the demand to be more “scrupulous” in applying the guidance.

He replied: “Well, the department, I guess.”

Asked if it was definitely not him, he said: “I’m not sure… I don’t want to give you a misleading answer.”

But when asked by DNS why he thought AtW staff were suddenly following guidance more scrupulously, he said he had no “no doubt seen a submission, which I have said ‘OK’ to, saying that it’ll be scrupulously applied, to achieve consistency apart from anything”.

He added: “The way things work is a proposal goes into a submission, which comes to me, and I say, ‘OK,’ and it’s very likely that I’ve been advised that we are going to apply the guidance more scrupulously.”

During the interview at Labour’s annual party conference in Liverpool, Sir Stephen said he could not remember when he signed off on the order, but that he would find out.

But when DNS suggested it would then be possible to secure this order through a freedom of information request, he suggested that DWP would resist this request because such an order would have been “advice to ministers” – which would not have to be released under the Freedom of Information Act – even though the instructions would then have been sent out to all relevant AtW staff.

Just minutes earlier, he had claimed that Labour DWP ministers were “very substantially changing the culture of the department in a pro-transparency direction” (see separate story).

Sir Stephen then claimed that the order to AtW staff might not have been written down, and that it might only have been passed on through “a conversation, a staff meeting; who knows how it’s promulgated”.

He later declined several opportunities to welcome the increase in AtW claims, which he called a “huge surge in the number of applications”.

He said the increase meant “people are having to wait longer” to have their claims dealt with, which was “a big part of why we need to reform Access to Work and why we’re consulting on it”.

Asked again if it was a good thing that more disabled people were applying to AtW, he said: “I think there’s a lot to be said for Access to Work and the opportunities it opens up to people.

But we’ve got to have a system that works efficiently and does not keep people waiting for weeks and weeks and weeks.

And that’s the aim of our reform that we consulted on in the [Pathways to Work] green paper.”

The government’s decisions on AtW reform are set to be announced later this year.

2 October 2025

 

 

All the evidence from Labour conference points in one direction: More cuts to disability benefits

Information from Labour ministers and other party sources has shown beyond any doubt that the government is preparing for further attempts to cut spending on disability benefits over the next 12 months.

As disabled people who rely on benefits await the publication of a disability benefits white paper in the next couple of months, it became clear at the party’s annual conference in Liverpool that further cuts are being planned.

Disability News Service (DNS) has this week interviewed the minister for social security and disability; spoken to disabled party members; attended fringe events; spoken (briefly) to a former employment minister; and listened to speeches by the prime minister and the new work and pensions secretary, Pat McFadden.

DNS has also received a Labour briefing; read articles by other journalists with better government connections than DNS; and listened to a broadcast interview with Sir Keir Starmer, in which he said there was a “moral case” for reducing the number of young people with “mental health issues” on benefits.

The weight of this evidence makes it clear that – despite this summer’s government U-turn over billions of pounds of cuts to personal independence payment (PIP) – further cuts to disabled people’s support are on the way.

Two key targets for cuts are likely to be PIP and the health element of universal credit, and almost certainly one focus will be on those receiving support on the grounds of mental distress and trauma, particularly younger people.

On Monday, the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, announced new details of a “youth guarantee” – first announced last year – through which every 18-to-21-year-old in England would be guaranteed either a place in college or university, an apprenticeship, or one-to-one support to find a job.

Any young person still out of work, education or training after 18 months would be given a paid work placement.

The party later confirmed to DNS that there would be “conditionality” – which is likely to mean their benefits would be cut or stopped if the placement was turned down – although there would be “exemptions”, likely to include some sick and disabled young people.

Details on whether those forced onto these placements would receive at least the minimum wage will not be announced until next month’s budget.

McFadden strongly linked “dignity” with work in his speech to the conference, and he said he wanted an “opportunity welfare state” rather than a “dependency welfare state”.

Opportunity, he said, “starts with work”, and he added: “Make work the pathway to dignity, security, and pride.”

McFadden had already alarmed many disabled people before the conference, when he claimed there were “incentives” in the system for people to declare themselves unfit for work so they can “double their money”, and also claimed people were “declaring themselves long-term sick”.

Asked about those earlier comments this week, Sir Stephen Timms, the minister for social security and disability, said he thought McFadden was “onto something here” and had not made a mistake with those comments.

He pointed to the increase in the universal credit basic allowance and the cut in the “health premium” which he said were designed to prevent “quite a serious problem in the current system that is forcing people to aspire to be designated LCWRA* as a kind of destination” so they receive more benefits.

But he did insist that Labour ministers “have the backs of disabled people who can’t work”.

He said: “We are determined to open up opportunities for those who can work, but also to make sure that those who cannot work, and there will always be people who cannot possibly work, and we well understand that, that they will be properly supported.”

He insisted that government ministers had not “dialled up the rhetoric” on disabled claimants, were “making a very good fist of managing a challenging situation”, and that they were not scapegoating disabled people.

He said: “That is not our intention, and I don’t think that’s what we’re doing.

What we are wanting to do is opening up opportunities for disabled people who for too long have been barred from opportunities they ought to be able to take advantage of.”

But Ellen Morrison, one of the most influential disabled activists in the party, as the representative of disabled members on Labour’s national executive committee, told DNS this week that McFadden had been “hinting at the worrying direction that this is going to take”, which looks like “increased conditionality”.

She said: “They are consistently making young people the target. We have to be really careful in the disabled people’s movement not to allow young people to become the target.”

In combination with the existing cuts to the universal credit health element, to be implemented for new claimants from next April, she said the government’s new policies suggest there will be “people who might be forced into either taking inaccessible or unsuitable work, or they are going to be faced with sanctions or destitution.

I don’t think you give people the support that they need by punishing them.”

She said this was combined with the government’s failure to commit to increased funding for the Access to Work disability employment scheme (see separate story).

Morrison said: “I don’t think it’s really about supporting people into work at all.

I don’t believe that’s the motive behind this. It’s to get people off benefits and off any kind of financial support. It’s really short-term thinking.

It’s going to be young people first and there’s more to come for disabled people. A lot more to come.”

The i Paper reported that McFadden was working with Reeves to “craft changes to the welfare system” as a replacement for the cuts the government had to abandon over the summer, and that they would be “laid out step by step over time rather than launched in one big package, in a bid to minimise the risks of a major political backlash once again”.

It also reported that Reeves told a conference fringe event on Tuesday: “A thousand people are going onto PIP claims a day, the majority of those are young people going on to disability benefits with mental health problems.

I’m not denying there are mental health problems; there are massive mental health problems, especially post-Covid.

But I would prefer to be using money to help support people to get into work and to get that treatment in the health service than to pay people to be on benefits and often have them trapped out of work without the support that they need.

I didn’t win that argument, we didn’t win that argument this year, but we can’t go on like this and keep adding to welfare costs.”

The concerns that the government plans to target young people with mental distress were further heightened by the prime minister in an interview yesterday (Wednesday) with BBC Radio Four’s Today programme.

Sir Keir Starmer was asked by the BBC’s Nick Robinson if he was “prepared to say, as prime minister, that being anxious, even being depressed, is a terrible thing to have, but it’s not a good enough reason to stop looking for work”.   

In response, the prime minister made it clear that cuts were coming and he suggested that the government wanted to provide support services for those with mental distress instead of – as highlighted by at least one concerned disabled activist – both benefits and support.

He told Robinson: “I think we need to look again at this issue of mental health and ask ourselves a fundamental question, which is: would we not be better putting our money in the resources and support that is needed for mental health than simply saying it’s to be provided in benefits.

And we’re not saying you shouldn’t have benefits for mental health issues, but I do think we need to examine this quite carefully.”

He said he was “particularly concerned about young people” and the number of young people who are on benefits for mental health reasons.

He said that was “wrong” because “if you are on benefits in your 20s, it is going to be extremely difficult to get off benefits for the rest of your life”, adding: “So there’s a moral case for changing that that I’m perfectly prepared to make.”

The government’s reluctance to reassure those unable to work was demonstrated by a brief exchange between DNS and former employment minister Alison McGovern, now a minister for local government and homelessness, who was speaking in a fringe meeting on the “dignity of work”.

Asked what her message was to those disabled people unable to work because they were not well enough to do so, and about the shortage of jobs that are available and suitable for sick and disabled people, she offered only half-hearted reassurance.

She said: “My message to disabled people is we believe in their right to work, like everybody else.

All the discussions we have been having [are] about trying to make that work suitable and appropriate.

We must always protect people who can’t work, but through new technology and forms of work I think that opens up chances and opportunities for disabled people and others and I want to make sure that people are able to take up those opportunities.”

After the meeting, DNS tried twice to engage with McGovern to ask her to provide further reassurance for sick and disabled people concerned about the government’s policy, but she twice declined to comment further, even briefly, saying she had another engagement to attend.

During the event she had heard from the non-profit organisation Timewise, which has just published research showing that only 2.5 per cent of sick and disabled people who are off work long-term move back into work in any given year.

Of the few that do, more than half (57 per cent) go into jobs that are physically demanding and are associated with higher levels of unpredictable, inflexible and excessive hours.

This contributes to another finding, that more than half of the jobs taken by those who were formerly “inactive or long-term sick” do not last for more than four months.

*Limited capability for work-related activity

2 October 2025

 

 

DWP paid nearly £90,000 to disabled claimant left homeless and at risk of harm after years of errors

A disabled person was left with “ongoing risks” of harm for more than five years – and was even left homeless – after the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) missed multiple opportunities to provide them with the benefits they were entitled to.

It took the intervention of the Independent Case Examiner to correct the years of errors with their various claims, which led to them receiving a payment of £55,000, as well as compensation of £3,000 for the “hardship” DWP had caused.

They had already received an arrears payment of nearly £30,000 in 2023, after their state pension had been wrongly stopped for four years.

The case was discussed in the annual report from the Independent Case Examiner, Joanna Wallace, who deals with complaints about DWP, and she revealed that years of errors by the department had caused “ongoing risks” to the claimant, who had “very poor physical health and housing problems”.

Her report shows DWP made at least nine significant errors with the case from 2018 – including multiple missed opportunities to rectify its mistakes – when it started the process to move the claimant from disability living allowance to personal independence payment (PIP).

The errors included a missed opportunity to consider if the claimant needed extra support with their PIP claim; failing to act on a letter explaining they had moved home; and failing to follow up a letter that was returned unopened.

DWP also failed to act in 2020, when the claimant asked why they had not been receiving any pension or benefits since the previous year.

Even when the claimant contacted DWP in 2023 to explain that the lack of benefits had caused a significant deterioration in their physical and mental health, which had left them homeless, the department “continued to miss putting things right” and failed to consider any reasonable adjustments for a new attendance allowance claim.

It also failed to review the claimant’s suspended pension payments.

It was only when the claimant contacted DWP again later in 2023 that their state pension was reinstated, and arrears of nearly £30,000 were paid.

But there was no evidence of an apology, and DWP still failed to consider the suspended pension credit claim, while making a further error with a new pension credit claim later that year.

Eventually, ICE was notified of the case, and it “took the exceptional step of reaching out to DWP immediately so we could work together urgently to put things right for our customer”.

This led to DWP making a payment of nearly £55,000 in connection with the claimant’s DLA, state pension and pension credit claims.

Wallace also recommended a “consolatory payment” of a further £3,000 because of “the errors and lack of vital support to an extremely vulnerable customer, which had clearly exacerbated the long-term issues with their health and their housing situation” while DWP had “continued to miss opportunities to put things right”.

Asked this week if the case showed there were still multiple problems with the benefits system, and how one claimant could have faced so many errors, DWP said it had introduced thorough procedures to investigate and learn lessons from cases where mistakes were made.

It also said that it used sources such as internal process reviews (see separate story) and its Serious Case Panel to identify and address systemic issues, as well as ICE’s reports.

A DWP spokesperson said: “We regret the mistakes that were made in this case and we are determined to learn from them.

We support millions of people every year and our top priority is they get the benefits to which they are entitled as soon as possible, and to ensure they receive a supportive and compassionate service.”

The report says ICE cleared 2,232 complaints in 2024-25, of which 1,514 were investigated, 567 were resolved (an agreement reached before evidence in the case is requested), 97 were settled (an agreement reached after evidence is submitted but before any investigation is carried out), and 54 were withdrawn.

Of the 1,514 that were investigated, 892 (59 per cent) were fully or partially upheld, 618 (41 per cent) were not upheld and in four cases (less than one per cent) ICE was unable to reach a finding.

Of 205 cases relating to disability benefits that were dealt with in 2024-25, 73 were resolved or settled to the complainant’s satisfaction, 121 ICE investigation reports were issued, and 11 were withdrawn.

Of the 121 investigation reports, 53 (44 per cent) were upheld or partially upheld, 66 (55 per cent) were not upheld and in two cases ICE was unable to reach a finding.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

2 October 2025

 

 

Disability minister struggles to point to any significant achievements in his first year in post

The minister for social security and disability has struggled to point to any significant achievements on disability equality after more than a year in post, but he insisted that the government does not need a separate minister for disabled people.

The Labour government has been consistently criticised for not appointing a stand-alone minister for disabled people and instead combining that role with the social security brief under Sir Stephen Timms.

But in an interview with Disability News Service (DNS) at this week’s annual Labour conference in Liverpool, Sir Stephen struggled to point to any significant achievements in the 14 months since his appointment, excluding employment and work and pensions issues.

Asked for three key achievements, he pointed first to the publication in July of new five-year plans to improve the use of British Sign Language (BSL) by government departments.

This followed the British Sign Language Act, a private members’ bill introduced under the last Conservative government, which legislated for the government to report on how departments use BSL in their communications.

He also pointed to the government signing the Solfagnano Treaty (PDF) – a watered-down version of the UN disability convention – during a G7 ministerial meeting in Italy last October.

The treaty appears to have been mentioned just once in parliament – last December – since it was signed, and has been almost completely ignored by politicians, the media, and disabled people.

Sir Stephen also highlighted the “preparations” the government was making for a “cross-government plan” on disability.

Asked why there did not appear to have been any discussions with disabled people’s organisations about this plan, he said: “Internally, there’s been lots of discussion, and the fruits of that will become apparent in the coming months.”

Asked about the lack of progress in his role as disability minister, he said: “I think a lot’s been done, actually.

And I’m hoping that the fruit of that will become increasingly apparent as time goes on.”

He said he did not believe his job – with responsibility for both social security and disability – was too extensive, and he said predecessors under Conservative governments also had responsibilities that were “actually quite wide” and extended outside the “strict disability group”.

But disabled activists at the conference – and outside it – repeated the long-standing calls for a separate minister for disabled people.

Emily Pomroy-Smith, a member of Disability Labour’s executive committee, told DNS that disabled people had been calling repeatedly for a separate minister to cover disability, which was a “very, very important” demand.

She said: “The brief is massive, and it is too big for one person to do on their own.

We would [also] prefer it wasn’t sat under the Department for Work and Pensions.”

Disabled activist Klint Durham, who took part in a Disabled People Against Cuts protest outside the conference on Monday (see separate story), said he would also like to see a stand-alone minister for disabled people.

He said the remit of that post would need to cover areas across government, including housing, transport, employment and community engagement.

2 October 2025

 

 

Labour ignores disabled people and accessible housing crisis – again – as it announces plans for new towns

Labour has again ignored disabled people when making a major housing announcement, after revealing plans for a “new generation of new towns” but refusing to explain how it will ensure they are designed to be accessible to disabled people.

Housing secretary Steve Reed told his party’s annual conference in Liverpool on Sunday that the 12 new towns across England would include GP surgeries, libraries, schools, green spaces and transport links.

Building work on three of the new towns will begin before the next general election, with the government working with “world class architects”.

Reed said he would do “whatever it takes” to build the homes.

But Labour this week failed to make any pledge that accessibility would be central to the design of the new towns.

Asked for Reed’s promise to disabled people on the new towns, the Labour party had refused to comment by noon today (Thursday), three days after Disability News Service (DNS) asked the question.

Nearly 15 months after the general election, disabled people are still waiting for the new government to say whether it will introduce stricter minimum accessibility standards for new-build homes in England, three years after a pledge by the last Conservative government – which was never fulfilled – to take action to address the critical shortage of accessible housing.

At last year’s conference, after DNS questioned the party on the failure of ministers to mention the accessible housing crisis, a Labour spokesperson had promised that the government would “set out its policies on accessible new build housing shortly”.

A year on, and disabled people are still waiting for that promise to be fulfilled.

Reed was also the latest Labour minister to say the government was fighting for “hard working people”, apparently ignoring those who are unable to work, including many disabled people who need accessible homes.

He was speaking as an independent report – commissioned by the government – recommended 12 potential locations for new towns across England, with at least 10,000 new homes in each location.

But a brief search through the 135-page report appears to show no mentions of disabled people or the accessible housing crisis, although there is a brief reference to the need for “homes for older people, as well as specialist housing built to accessible and adaptable standards”.

Emily Pomroy-Smith, a member of Disability Labour’s executive committee, said the new towns appeared to be a “really exciting opportunity to set the benchmark for accessibility” and it was crucial for disabled people to be involved in those plans from the beginning.

She said there was no reason why accessibility could not be built into the foundations of the programme.

Disabled activist Flick Williams, a retired disability equality trainer and access consultant, who was in Liverpool to take part in a Disabled People Against Cuts protest outside the conference (see separate story), said she was not at all optimistic about the new towns announcement.

She said the “signs were there” when there was no mention of the accessible housing crisis in last autumn’s National Planning Policy Framework.

She said: “We are just missing from everything they do.”

She said her message to Reed was: “If you want disabled people to be active in the labour market, you need to build us accessible homes.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Labour uses conference to sideline disabled people… unless they are working

The Labour party has used its annual conference to stress – once again – that its focus is on supporting “working people”, rather than disabled people who are unable to work.

In his 6,300-word speech to the conference on Tuesday, the prime minister did not mention disabled people once, other than in relation to the work of carers, care workers and volunteers, and a brief mention of his late disabled brother who he said was “badly failed by the education system”.

In contrast, he mentioned “working people” 17 times, including telling the conference audience that the state will be “accountable to working people”, that he wanted to see “working people in control of their public services”, and arguing that it was “working people who paid the price of Tory decline”, while stressing that “Labour is the party for working people” and that he would “fight for working people”.

The concerns about Sir Keir Starmer’s focus on “working people” date back to 2022 and a speech he made to Scottish Labour’s annual conference, at which he declared publicly that Labour was “the party of working people”.

His chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has an even longer troubling track record, having said 10 years ago that Labour did not want to be seen as “the party to represent those who are out of work” and that it was “not the party of people on benefits”.

In his own speech, earlier on Tuesday, health and social care secretary Wes Streeting stressed his determination to build a National Care Service “worthy of the name”.

Labour’s only significant social care announcement was the first ever fair pay agreement for care workers, with an initial £500 million in funding to deliver “better pay, terms and conditions” for adult care workers across England.

In contrast to the prime minister’s speech, Streeting mentioned disabled people three times, highlighting how many disabled people were now surviving with conditions “that would have cut their lives short thanks to breakthroughs in medical science that allows them to not only survive, but to thrive”.

He said that “if we want to match longer lives with better lives, then we must build a social care system to meet their needs”.

And he highlighted the government’s decision to provide more funding for disabled facilities grants, which has provided “safety, dignity, independence and quality of life”, as well as “the biggest uplift in carers’ allowance since the 1970s”.

It has been clear since at least 2022 that Labour’s priority in government would be lifting the pay of care workers before any moves to reduce or scrap care charges.

Any firm decisions on long-term reform will wait for the conclusions of an independent commission, led by former civil servant Baroness [Louise] Casey.

The first phase of the commission will report next year, but the second phase, with recommendations for longer-term reform, will not be completed until 2028.

Last year, Disability Law Service published research which found that disabled people across England were continuing to face unlawful discrimination and inequality on an “unparalleled” scale because of “unjust” social care charging policies.

2 October 2025

 

 

Labour’s attacks on rights ‘have led to massive resurgence’ in disability movement, protest hears

The Labour government’s attack on disabled people’s support has led to a “massive resurgence” in the disabled people’s movement in the last year, a protest outside the party’s annual conference has heard.

Monday’s protest highlighted Labour’s failure to stop the “slow violence” that has led to the killing of countless disabled benefit claimants at the hands of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), and the government’s refusal to act on the genocide in Gaza.

The Genocide Abroad, Democide at Home protest was held just outside the boundary fence of Labour’s annual conference in Liverpool.

The speeches were at one point being watched by nearly 100 protesters and passers-by.

The aim of the protest was to draw parallels and links between the genocide in Gaza and the “democide at home”, with activists believing that thousands of disabled people have been killed by Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) state violence in the last 15 years.

But it also expressed solidarity with trans rights activists and called for links between the three movements.

The protest began with a recording of the names of more than 100 disabled people who had lost their lives through DWP’s actions and failings, including Errol Graham, Jodey Whiting,  Stephen Carré, Roy Curtis and Faiza Ahmed and more recent victims of DWP bureaucratic violence such as Tracie, Kevin Gale, and David.

The protest was organised by Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) branches from Merseyside, Leeds, Manchester and York.

Rick Burgess, from Manchester DPAC, said the Labour government had not tried to reverse the Conservative cuts to disability support but instead “attempted to push farther and further”.

He said the attempted cuts to personal independence payment would have led “to many more deaths”, but disabled people forced the government to back down.

He said: “We did that. We started the end of this absolutely pathetic and failed Starmer government.”

He then led a chant of “no more benefit deaths”.

Burgess added later: “We still have a political system that absolutely denies disabled people’s right to live a good life on equal terms with everyone else.

We need social security, we need social care, and we need social justice.”

Referring to Gaza, he said: “If governments see genocide is a viable policy solution, they will start thinking about using it elsewhere.”

Billie Gibson, from Crips Against Cuts Merseyside, led a series of chants, including “Keir Starmer, disabled harmer” and “don’t cut PIP, tax the rich”, before telling the protest that the “warfare on disabled people needs to stop”.

Dr China Mills, who leads the Deaths by Welfare project at Healing Justice Ldn, told protesters: “Disabled people have been telling us for well over a decade that the welfare system is killing people, and Labour, from New Labour to now, have cooked up many of the policies that kill people.

People are being killed because the government doesn’t think that disabled people matter or have any value and because to them work equals worth.

We think that these killings go deeper than mistakes or flaws in the system.

The system isn’t broken; it is functioning exactly as it was designed.”

Jessica Ryan, from Disability Rebellion, which helped promote the protest online for those who could not attend in person, highlighted the impact of Labour’s cuts on the next generation of disabled people, and the unfairness of the government’s treatment of disabled people.

Rhi, from Merseyside DPAC, but also a researcher for the Trans Safety Network, said: “This is a government that seems extremely determined to be remembered for its genocidal foreign policy and its democidal domestic policy, as well as attacking our right to protest.

As a disabled and trans person, I have long insisted that disabled people’s liberation and trans people’s liberation will be one and the same fight, and that our oppression is built with the same tools, but these last few years have made this increasingly clear to more and more of us.

It is a terrifying time to be a disabled person in the UK right now and it is a terrifying time to be a trans person here, too.

Disabled people and trans people are under attack but when we join together to fight back, we are much, much stronger.”

Emma Hewitt, from Leeds DPAC, said she had been a disability rights activist for 20 years but it had only been in the last 18 months that she had “really seen the attacks on us”.

She said: “It’s not just the fact that they are cutting our services, it’s the fact that they are attacking us, they are attacking our right to live.

It’s so painful that not only do they not care about us, but they are quite happy to spend the money that we need for our support on genocide (in Gaza).

There has been a massive resurgence in the disabled people’s movement, and it just fills me with so much hope.

Every town in this country, every city, has got a disability rights group, not just Disabled People Against Cuts, we’ve got Crips Against Cuts, who are this amazing new group, Disability Rebellion, you guys are my heroes, you’ve been finding new ways for us to be able to campaign so no-one gets left behind, so everyone has a voice.”

Disabled activist Flick Williams, from York DPAC, said it was “so important” to be at the protest because the imminent DWP white paper – which is expected to include a series of further cuts to benefits – will be published later this year.

She said she had been struck by the names of those who had been killed due to DWP “slow violence”.

She said: “I just thought: there are going to be so many more.”

Another disabled activist, Klint Durham, told DNS he had travelled to Liverpool from Leeds to show his “contempt for the Labour government and its attack on disabled people and the welfare cuts”.

After 14 years of Conservative austerity, he said, he could not believe that a Labour government “would think to introduce more cuts”, and that it was “very clear” that the Labour-run DWP needed to “listen to organisations of disabled people and not charities”.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

2 October 2025

 

 

Minister asks DWP to consider releasing secret reports on deaths to grieving relatives

A minister has asked the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) whether it could release secret reports to families whose relatives’ deaths have been linked to DWP’s actions and failings.

Ever since Disability News Service (DNS) first revealed the existence of the secret reviews in October 2014, DWP has repeatedly refused to even alert the families of those who have died that an investigation has been carried out.

The department has insisted – as it did last week when it again refused to tell lawyers for the family of Jodey Whiting whether it carried out a probe into her case – that such reviews are “internal retrospective investigations focused on organisational learning, not public accountability”.

The probes were previously known as peer reviews but are now called internal process reviews (IPRs).

The only IPRs ever to be released to grieving relatives have come after orders made by a coroner or a judge.

DNS is aware of only two such cases, including the IPR ordered to be released by the coroner who heard the 2021 inquest into the death of Philippa Day.

But DNS told the social security and disability minister Sir Stephen Timms this week that safeguarding adults reviews and domestic homicide reviews are released to families and are published, although the identities of the subjects of the reviews are disguised.

DNS also pointed to the eight-year campaign for justice and accountability led by Jodey Whiting’s mother, Joy Dove, and her struggle to secure the IPR she believes was carried out into the circumstances surrounding her daughter’s death.

Speaking during an interview with DNS at Labour’s annual conference in Liverpool, Sir Stephen said: “Internal process reviews are what the name implies, they are for internal consumption within the DWP to look at where we got things wrong and how are we going to put them right.

So that is kind of the nature of them, so I don’t think it’s surprising inherently that they are not shared more widely.”

But he then said that DNS was “raising a very reasonable issue here, and particularly asking whether families should, in certain circumstances, be able to see them”.

He said he had asked DWP civil servants “to take a look at this, and I am going to be receiving some advice on that subject”, although he said it was “difficult and there is a duty of confidentiality that the department owes to people”, even after they have died.

He added: “There might be a need to change the law here.

Anyway, I’ve asked officials to have a look at this and to come back to me.”

His comments came after Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, told DNS last week that he was hoping to use the government’s new Hillsborough Law to force DWP to release IPRs to relatives.

During Sunday’s interview, Sir Stephen admitted that it was only because of a DNS news story that he became aware that a report – commissioned by Conservative work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey in 2020 – had called for DWP to reduce suicides of benefit claimants and other “very bad cases”.

The Complaints, Suicides and Other Matters report was written by Tory peer Baroness [Lucy] Neville-Rolfe, but DWP has told DNS that it would be too expensive to find out what happened in response to the 11 recommendations she made five years ago.

Among her recommendations was for DWP to set up a new register of “very bad cases”; to review its safeguarding system, including an analysis of its effectiveness in reducing suicides; and to review the IPR system.

Sir Stephen said on Sunday: “I actually did not know that Baroness Neville-Rolfe had done a report for the DWP until my office told me that you were likely to ask me about it.

That’s the first time I was aware of this report having been done.”

DNS has been writing news stories about the report since May this year, but it appears that no-one in DWP briefed him on the report or those stories until the lead-up to the conference.

Sir Stephen said he would now ask civil servants what happened in response to the 11 recommendations made in the report.

He said: “I will find out about it.”

He said Labour ministers were now “very substantially changing the culture of the department in a pro-transparency direction.

I’m not claiming that we’ve entirely got there yet, but we’ve made a lot of headway.”

Sir Stephen also confirmed that the disabled members of his new independent disability advisory panel would no longer be expected to sign non-disclosure agreements, following a backlash over the “completely unacceptable” measure.

Instead of an NDA, DWP said it would “collaboratively agree the confidentiality arrangements as part of the terms of engagement with the panel once the membership is confirmed”.

The deadline for applications has now been extended by two weeks to 13 October.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

2 October 2025

 

 

No 10 meeting sees Labour hold out olive branch to disabled activists after breakdown of trust over cuts

Senior figures in the Labour party pledged to try to rebuild trust with disabled people at a meeting with activists earlier this month at 10 Downing Street, Disability News Service can reveal.

The 90-minute meeting between a delegation of seven disabled people and senior figures within the Labour administration took place on 2 September.

It came after a text message from Joe Watkinson, deputy vice chair of Disability Labour, to Claire Reynolds, who was at the time the party’s political director in Downing Street, but is now Labour’s executive director of stakeholder relations.

Watkinson had suggested the need for a meeting to try to rebuild Labour’s relationship with disabled people after the damage caused by the government’s attempts – later abandoned – to cut billions in spending from personal independence payment, and the cuts that will be introduced through its Universal Credit Act, and to ensure disabled people “have a voice and can be heard in a constructive way”.

He told Disability News Service (DNS) at this week’s Labour conference in Liverpool: “Disabled people cannot afford a Reform government.

The only hope we have is via a Labour government. We need to reset the relationship with disabled members and that’s at the core of everything we need to do.”

Among the disabled people who attended the meeting were representatives of the Co-operative Party – where Watkinson is chair of the party’s disability network – union activists and representatives of Disability Labour (DL), including Kathy Bole, DL’s chair, and Emily Pomroy-Smith, another member of DL’s executive committee.

As well as Reynolds, other Labour representatives at the meeting included a work and welfare special adviser, and a representative of the party’s general secretary.

It is not yet clear what promises the party will make to those who attended the meeting, other than a pledge to hold further such meetings.

But Watkinson said: “It was a very constructive meeting. It was taken seriously. It was a very frank and honest discussion.

For the majority of the meeting, they sat there and listened.”

Pomroy-Smith said: “It was about using our lived experience to inform what they were doing. They were ready and listening.

Claire really did fight for this. She really fought for the meeting to happen, and she’s continuing that in her new role.”

She said the government representatives they met were aware of the level of anger among disabled people at the way the PIP and universal credit cuts had been handled earlier this year.

She said: “What we were coming with was solutions. The focus was how can we rebuild and what does that look like.

It was about moving forward. How do we prevent it from happening again.”

Among the issues raised were the kind of language used by ministers, and inaccurate briefings on social security reform.

Pomroy-Smith added: “At the moment there is a real need to amplify the voices of disabled people and not be spoken about.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Activist tells conference meeting: Hostile rhetoric under Labour has left me feeling hounded and unsafe

One of the only disabled activists to speak at Labour’s annual conference has delivered a powerful rebuke to ministers who have failed to do anything to curb the rising levels of disability-related hostility.

Fingers, a disabled RAF veteran who campaigns with Crips Against Cuts and the new group Disabled Resistance, told a fringe event on Monday how her car had been attacked and she had been called a “scrounger” after a young man saw her blue parking badge on the dashboard.

She told an Amnesty International UK fringe event on fixing the broken social security system: “What the language of the last 18 months has done to me is, for the first time in my life… I feel hounded, I feel unsafe.”

She said she felt as though the hostile rhetoric directed at disabled people had turned her into “a non-person”.

She said: “You’re looking at someone who is unsustainable. Why do I have to be a unit of productivity in this country?

The words we use are fundamentally important. Not one newspaper has run an editorial or article about how these words are making us feel.

I fought for the country, I worked for the NHS, and now I am effectively a ‘useless eater’.”

Fingers, who also used to chair a mental health charity, told Disability News Service (DNS) after the meeting that four young men had walked past her car as she was waiting at traffic lights in Loughborough about a month ago.

They had seen her blue badge and one of them then bounced on the bonnet of her car and shouted: “Bloody scrounger!”.

She wound down the window and gave them a “stream of obscenities and invective”, but later her anger turned to fear for her safety and that of other disabled people.

She told DNS: “The rhetoric surrounding people who require support because of ill-health has become positively threatening.

It has been encouraged tacitly by the government.

It dehumanises people who can’t work and there has been not one shred of fightback by the government about the knock-on effects of their rhetoric.

It has given a licence for anybody at all to pick on and say hateful things about disabled people, and it’s everywhere, and that makes me feel unsafe.”

The former Labour member, who joined the party to vote for Jeremy Corbyn as party leader and left when he was replaced by Sir Keir Starmer, said she had expected this kind of rhetoric from a Conservative government, but it was “shocking” that it had continued under a Labour government, which had even made the situation worse.

She was also critical that the fringe event had been held on an inaccessible stage without a ramp, as highlighted by Daily Mirror columnist Susie Boniface, who chaired an event in the same location within ACC Liverpool.

Although she is not a wheelchair-user, Fingers has a physical impairment and struggled with the inaccessible stage, which she said was “shameful for Labour”.

Because of the lack of chairs in the conference centre, she had already been forced to resort to sitting in the accessible toilet to prepare for her presentation at the fringe event.

She said: “I was in quite a bit of pain when I left that conference. It would have been alleviated if I had had anything other than a disabled loo to sit on.”

DNS reports elsewhere this week that Disability Labour – which often provides free access advice to the party at its annual conference – was priced out of attending this year’s event by the party.

Meanwhile, disabled Labour MP Nadia Whittome told the Amnesty fringe event that she was “really proud” to have played a small part in the backbench rebellion that led to the government withdrawing its planned cuts of billions of pounds to spending on personal independence payment.

But she pointed out that cuts to the health element of universal credit for most new claimants are still going ahead next spring.

She said campaigners must continue to fight against further government cuts to disability benefits, and against disability discrimination, and for investment in public services.

She echoed Fingers’ comments on the political rhetoric and told the fringe event: “People’s worth is not determined by their economic contribution.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Disability Labour priced out of conference after cash-strapped party withdraws financial support

The campaigning organisation that represents disabled people within Labour had to cancel plans to attend this week’s conference in Liverpool after the party asked it to pay thousands of pounds in fees.

Members of Disability Labour appealed for last-minute financial help during a visit to 10 Downing Street earlier this month (see separate story) but were told the party could no longer afford to help it cover its costs at conference.

For the first time since 2018, Disability Labour – which has spent years providing free advice to the party on access issues – was asked to pay for a space for a stand at Labour’s annual conference, but it was told this would cost £2,500.

Disability News Service (DNS) has been told that other Labour-affiliated socialist societies have also had to pull out of attending the conference this week because they could no longer afford the increasing cost and because of the lack of financial support from the party.

The party has told DNS that the changes to financial arrangements at the conference were applied equally to all 21 socialist societies and were not unique to Disability Labour.

Disability Labour said this week that it did not believe it had been singled out.

Last year, it had to pay only a few hundred pounds to cover the cost of electricity and other costs, including hiring a small stand where its members could provide advice to other disabled party members and use as a base to lobby politicians and delegates on disability issues.

It would likely have had to pay thousands more to hire a venue at the conference for a fringe event, and hundreds of pounds more for accommodation in Liverpool.

Emily Pomroy-Smith, a member of Disability Labour’s executive committee, said the party “did express regret” that it had not been able to offer the same support as in recent years, and Disability Labour was now in discussions with the party about future support.

She said: “We want to work with the party to get us back here.

We are asking the party to meet us halfway and work with us so next year we can be back. It’s really important.

In a year where we have seen difficulties and damaged relationships with disabled people and communities, it’s really important that we see a willingness to rebuild that, which we have had.

Obviously, it’s disappointing that we are not able to be here in our normal capacity.

The Disability Labour stand is a hub for disabled people. We end up supporting disabled members and visitors’ access issues and signposting them [to support].

We do provide a service.”

She added: “Conference is getting more and more expensive. That’s not just for Disability Labour.”

Local hotels have increased prices by as much as six times their usual rates, she said.

Joe Watkinson, deputy vice chair of Disability Labour, said: “Disabled members need us to be here. It’s important that we are here.”

Pomroy-Smith and Watkinson were only able to attend because the independent transport trade union TSSA covered many of their expenses, paying for Pomroy-Smith’s accommodation and travel, and travel for Watkinson.

Kathy Bole, Disability Labour’s chair, said they were told at the No 10 meeting in early September that the party’s financial problems meant it could not support Disability Labour at this year’s conference.

Bole said Disability Labour executives had reluctantly decided not to use a large chunk of the society’s limited funds to hire a stand and host a fringe event.

Disability Labour is a socialist society affiliated to the Labour party, but has members from across the Labour spectrum, although its leadership and membership have traditionally supported causes on the left of the party.

It has a long history of acting as a “critical friend” of the party at its annual conference, raising concerns about access, policy and the need for co-production.

It has also spent years lobbying Labour to do more to address disability discrimination within the party.

Last year, it was critical of the new Labour government’s decision to appoint only a part-time disability minister, and supported a disabled delegate who was refused entry to the conference with her assistance dog.

In September 2022, its members supported calls for the party to do more on eliminating the barriers faced by its own disabled members.

It raised similar concerns the previous year, prompting a pledge from the party’s general secretary that he would put an end to the years of discrimination experienced by disabled party members.

And, as part of the party’s online conference in September 2020 – in the early months of the pandemic – Disability Labour pushed the party for a stronger commitment to plans drawn up by disabled people that would solve the social care crisis by setting up a co-produced National Independent Living Service.

Disability Labour has also hosted important fringe events, and in September 2023 its event was attended by four shadow ministers.

This event drew the promise from shadow disability minister Vicky Foxcroft that, if Labour won power, “every single one of our ministers will be ministers for disabled people”.

A Labour party spokesperson said in a statement this week: “We are committed to providing a safe and accessible environment at conference for disabled people.

There are more accessibility stewards working at conference this year compared to last year, and we have also provided these stewards with an increased level of training.

We also continuously engage with Disability Labour on a wide range of issues, including greater celebration of Disability History Month which the party has begun work on.”

2 October 2025

 

 

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

The family of a disabled man who died after not being given any food for nine days while being treated in an NHS hospital has told ITV News, “we thought he was having nutrition… but as it turns out, they were starving him.” This comes as an ITV News investigation has revealed a crisis in the care of people with learning difficulties and autistic people. Bereaved families have told ITV News they believe their children died due to failures in NHS care: https://www.itv.com/news/2025-10-01/i-dont-want-to-die-downs-syndrome-man-starved-to-death-in-hospital

2 October 2025

 

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

Sep 262025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

A graphic on a black background, using white and mint green text. At the top, in a large font, is the text “hashtag No Sham Panel. Online Disability Protest.” This is followed by text that says “The government says it’s setting up a group of disabled people to give advice. They are calling this the Independent Disability Advisor Panel. But we are worried because it looks like the panel won’t be fair. The government only wants a panel that will agree with them.”

A graphic on a black background, using white and mint green text. There are two headings in mint green that ask “when” and “how.” Underneath “when” is the text “Saturday 27th and Sunday 28th September 2025.” Underneath “how” is the text “follow our guide at: bit.ly/panel-protest for instructions.” Below, in a large font, is the text in white and all-caps “then spread the word!”, followed in green by “hashtag No Sham Panel.”

A graphic on a black background, using white and mint green text. At the top, in a large font, is the text “hashtag No Sham Panel. Online Disability Protest.” This is followed by a speech bubble containing the text “I’ve send in my application to the sham government disability panel. I’m letting them know that I refuse to accept their unfair rules. You can do it too!” Underneath is the Disabled People Against Cuts Wales logo and the Disability Rebellion logo. There are two headings in mint green that ask “when” and “how.” Underneath “when” is the text “Saturday 27th Sunday 28th September 2025.” Underneath “how” is the text “follow our guide at: bit.ly/panel-protest for instructions.”

 

Take part at bit.ly/panel-protest

 


 

Plain text:

 

#NoShamPanel Online Disability Protest:

The government says it’s setting up a group of disabled people to give advice.

They are calling this the Independent Disability Advisory Panel.

But we are worried because it looks like the panel won’t be fair.

The government only wants a panel that will agree with them.

 

When?

Saturday 27th and Sunday 28th of September 2025.

 

How?

Follow our guide at bit.ly/panel-protest for instructions.

 

Then spread the word! #NoShamPanel

Tell everyone:

I’ve sent in my application to the sham government disability panel.

I’m letting them know that I refuse to accept their unfair rules.

You can do it too!

You can also share our social media graphics with Alt text from our Google Drive folder.

 

Organised by

Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) and Disability Rebellion

Sep 252025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Contents

Davey stirs up hostility towards disabled claimants, as Lib Dem spokesperson links similar attacks to far right 1

Lib Dems want to use new Hillsborough Law to force DWP to release secret reports into deaths 3

Darling accuses DWP of ‘absolutely shameful’ cover-up over Access to Work changes 4

Disabled activists working with peers to address serious flaws in ‘dangerous’ assisted dying bill 5

UN calls for human rights assessment of government’s benefit cuts bill and mental health reforms 8

DWP is ‘dysfunctional’ and needs major review, says Lib Dem Steve Darling 11

Lib Dems insist they are still focused on social care, despite leader concentrating again on carers 13

New publications ask how disabled people and allies can hold the state to account for welfare state killings 15

Mother left ‘disgusted’ by DWP’s silence over secret report into Jodey Whiting’s death 17

Anger and frustration after DWP’s latest jobcentre announcement and McFadden’s ‘incentives’ comment 19

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week 21

 

 

Davey stirs up hostility towards disabled claimants, as Lib Dem spokesperson links similar attacks to far right

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey has whipped up hostility towards disabled people by suggesting there is widespread fraud among claimants of personal independence payment (PIP), despite his own work and pensions spokesperson linking similar unfounded attacks to the far right.

In an interview with Times Radio at the Liberal Democrat party conference in Bournemouth, Sir Ed suggested the reduction in face-to-face assessments had led to “quite a lot of fraud” among the recent increase in PIP claimants since the start of the pandemic.

But the latest figures from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) estimate that just 0.4 per cent of PIP spending in 2024-25 was due to fraud, while the previous year’s estimate had been zero per cent.

Despite these facts, Sir Ed said: “There’s a real suggestion in those numbers, by the way the Conservatives managed the system, that there’s quite a lot of fraud there and surely everyone can agree we should go after the fraud to make sure that people who need the benefits that people who are really disabled can still get them.”

But Sir Ed’s comments came on the same morning (Sunday) that his own work and pensions spokesperson, disabled MP Steve Darling, told Disability News Service that far-right activists were launching similar attacks on disabled claimants using dubious figures on economic inactivity.

Darling said: “My real fear is that in our now Trumpian world, [the far right] don’t need the facts to add up to make outlandish claims.”

He said it was disturbing how “the far right will just make up narratives for their own purposes, and demonising others is part of their playbook and sadly people with disabilities and quite often people with hidden disabilities are in their crosshairs.

It’s part of that push back against the far right [and what] we need to be doing is unpicking that, because otherwise that half-truth will be built on by the far right to demonise people with disabilities.”

Sir Ed also mirrored claims by right-wing politicians when he claimed in the Times Radio interview that it was vital to reduce spending on social security, despite widely-available official figures showing that expenditure is stable as a proportion of GDP*.

His comments on PIP were particularly embarrassing because he focused in his main conference speech on Tuesday on attacking Reform UK and its leader, Nigel Farage, warning repeatedly of the “Trump-inspired country Farage wants us to become”.

Asked about his leader’s comments, Darling declined to say if he agreed with them, but yesterday (Wednesday) he issued a statement through his party’s press office.

He said: “Liberal Democrats are proud champions for the most vulnerable in society.

We led the charge against the government’s ill-thought welfare cuts bill and played an instrumental role in defeating plans to slash PIP.

We will always stand up for disabled people and their carers.

Ed rightly pointed out that the Conservative party’s move to telephone assessments has damagingly undermined public trust in the welfare system.

A fair system of in-person assessments, where possible, is vital to make sure this crucial support is there for people who need it.

More broadly, Liberal Democrats have long argued the best way to reduce welfare spending is to tackle the root causes of the rising welfare bill – by seriously investing in health and care, and making it easier for disabled people to access the world of work.”

Sir Ed’s speech to the conference included just two mentions of disabled people, but neither in relation to his own party’s policies.

Instead, he mentioned family carers like himself 10 times in Tuesday’s speech, without once mentioning the adult social care charging crisis, which sees tens of thousands of disabled people falling into debt every year because of those charges (see separate story).

*Gross domestic product, the size of the country’s economy in a particular year

25 September 2025

 

 

Lib Dems want to use new Hillsborough Law to force DWP to release secret reports into deaths

The Liberal Democrats are set to try to use the government’s new Hillsborough Law to force the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to release secret reports into the deaths of disabled benefit claimants.

For years, the department has refused to hand bereaved relatives the internal process reviews (IPRs) it carries out into deaths that have been linked to its actions and failures.

It releases reviews only when ordered to do so by a coroner, or a court, or very rarely on other occasions – there is no record of it doing so in such circumstances – because it insists they are intended for learning purposes within the department.

This week, Disability News Service (DNS) has reported DWP’s latest refusal to release an IPR – or even to say if such a review was carried out – to a family, this time following the death of Jodey Whiting (see separate story).

Her mother, Joy Dove, is in her ninth year of campaigning for justice for her daughter, who took her own life in February 2017.

In a letter to Dove, DWP said IPRs were “internal retrospective investigations focused on organisational learning” and “often contain sensitive personal information about claimants” and so “could be considered a breach of privacy”, even though the claimant is dead.

The letter, from the Government Legal Department, said DWP was “working towards a more open approach to sharing findings and learning from IPRs”, but this is believed to refer only to anonymised recommendations made by the reviews rather than the facts they uncover.

DNS reported in June that a DWP director who gave evidence at the second inquest into Jodey Whiting’s suicide claimed she didn’t know whether an IPR had been carried out and would have to ask colleagues.

The minister for social security and disability, Sir Stephen Timms, came into his post last year pledging to increase transparency within the department.

But he has so far refused to change the department’s position, even though adult safeguarding reviews – sometimes examining the same deaths as IPRs – are released to relatives, and are published anonymously.

Now Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, has pledged to use the government’s new public office (accountability) bill, otherwise known as the Hillsborough Law, to force DWP to publish IPRs and release them to families.

This is because the new bill includes a legal duty on public authorities and public officials “to act with candour, transparency and frankness”.

In an interview with DNS at his party’s annual conference in Bournemouth, Darling said he wanted the bill to produce a “culture change” within DWP and the whole of Whitehall, and that he intends to ask parliamentary questions about how the release of IPRs should be part of that.

He said it should be the same approach as in the aviation industry when there are near misses and “things have gone wrong”.

Otherwise, he said, “how can you expect the rest of the organisation to learn from it and the rest of society to learn where things have gone wrong?”

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press

25 September 2025

 

 

Darling accuses DWP of ‘absolutely shameful’ cover-up over Access to Work changes

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has been accused of an “absolutely shameful” cover-up, after refusing to release documents that should show why disabled people across the country have faced cuts to their Access to Work support.

Disabled campaigners have been warning for the last 18 months of DWP cuts and inconsistent decisions on their Access to Work (AtW) claims.

But when social security and disability minister Sir Stephen Timms was challenged on these apparent cuts this summer, he insisted that no guidance had been issued to reduce support, and he said: “No changes have been made to Access to Work policy.”

In his response to a written parliamentary question from Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson Steve Darling in July, he said instead that guidance was “now being more consistently applied” and that “work has been underway to improve [AtW] decision-making by applying the guidance with greater consistency, to provide a fairer process”.

He said: “This may mean that some awards change at the point of renewal, but there has been no change in Scheme policy, or instruction to reduce support levels.”

But Sir Stephen added: “Any updates to operational guidance are reflected through the published version available online at GOV.UK.”

Disability News Service (DNS) subsequently submitted a freedom of information request for DWP to provide all the changes to AtW “operational guidance” in the last 24 months.

But DWP has now replied to say that, although it holds this information, it would take more than three-and-a-half working days to determine “whether the Department holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting it”, so it is not obliged to seek the documents under freedom of information laws.

The DWP freedom of information team said this was because “the time period you have chosen is very wide and the topic you ask about is very broad” and suggested instead that DNS should “narrow your request to the latest version of a specific section of a particular topic within Access to Work that you are interested in”.

Speaking to DNS at the Liberal Democrat conference in Bournemouth this week, Darling said this lack of transparency from DWP was “absolutely shameful”.

He said: “We need to have that transparency about what is going on, because the evidence we have has demonstrated that there have been significant changes [to people’s AtW support packages].”

He said he was convinced that cuts were being enacted by DWP even if they were coming through operational changes rather than alterations in policy.

He told DNS that he has heard from disabled people made redundant from disability charities who have been offered much lower levels of support when they applied for AtW support with their new job.

He said: “What was taken as a given with their previous employment, [AtW] are shrinking it down, whether it’s travel to work or the level of support workers, or the way support workers are employed.

It is just absolutely perverse.

I’m sure there are cuts; there are cost savings happening there and I’m sure the Treasury are delighted with it being sucked back into the system.”

A consultation on the future of the AtW scheme has now closed.

Work and pensions minister Baroness Sherlock said, in a written answer to the disabled Liberal Democrat peer Baroness [Celia] Thomas earlier this month, that DWP was now “reviewing all aspects of the Scheme now that the consultation has closed”.

25 September 2025

 

 

Disabled activists working with peers to address serious flaws in ‘dangerous’ assisted dying bill

Disabled activists who are working with sympathetic peers to address the serious risks posed by the assisted dying bill believe there is also still a chance that the legislation could eventually be thrown out by the House of Lords.

Not Dead Yet UK (NDY UK) said there were grounds for “hope” after the completion of the first two days of debate on the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill in the Lords.

Friday’s debate saw speakers opposed to the bill outnumbering supporters by about two to one.

NDY UK said the campaign was “in the best place it could have been, because we can’t kill the bill at this stage.

While NDY UK continues to oppose the bill in principle, it recognises the need to engage with the legislative process to help ensure, if the bill does pass, it contains the strongest possible safeguards to protect disabled people.”

Almost two-thirds of peers who spoke during the debate on Friday (19 September) were opposed to the current version of the bill, while a little over a third were in favour, a similar proportion to the first day of the debate the previous Friday (12 September).

Of 15 Labour peers who spoke on 19 September, nine were in favour, five were against, and one – speaking for the government – was neutral.

But of 29 Conservative speakers, just seven were in favour and 22 were opposed to the bill in its current form.

Liberal Democrat peers were split, with two on each side, while of 11 crossbench speakers, five were in favour and six were against, while seven non-affiliated peers spoke against the bill and just one in favour.

George Fielding, a member of NDY UK’s coordinating group, who watched both days of the second reading debate from the floor of the Lords – as he is a wheelchair-user – said he was “genuinely moved by the quality of the debate, by the nature of the debate”.

He said NDY UK and other opponents of legalisation had formed “a hotchpotch alliance” among cross-party and crossbench peers.

He said: “We are building a network and a consensus across the Lords and I think that is emblematic of the fact that this bill will touch pretty much every corner of our society, and every corner of the House of Lords has people we have found are sympathetic to our views.”

Fielding said NDY UK was convinced that the bill would be “significantly amended” by peers “because the consensus is, at the very, very least, that this is a dangerous bill, it will foreshorten lives.

At the very least, this is going to be one of the most significantly-amended bills in parliamentary history.”

He said NDY UK was “working closely with cross-party peers and allies to propose amendments aimed at closing loopholes and reducing risks, especially around coercion, eligibility, and judicial oversight.”

Fielding said there was an “incredible effort going in the Lords” – with input from NDY UK – to make the bill safer through amendments, because it was currently “unworkable”.

NDY UK welcomed the decision on Friday to set up a select committee of peers that will take expert oral evidence from ministers, professional bodies and legal experts, which Fielding said would be “another public opportunity” for peers to probe the bill’s weaknesses and to “demonstrate how dangerous this bill is”.

He added: “NDY UK plans to contribute evidence and research to inform the committee’s understanding of how disabled people may be affected by the bill.”

This committee will hold six evidence sessions over three weeks, beginning in the week of 20 October.

The committee stage will then follow, with its clause-by-clause examination of the bill.

Among those who spoke in Friday’s debate was disabled Conservative peer Lord [Kevin] Shinkwin, who said the bill would “prise open” a “Pandora’s box” that would be “the stuff of nightmares”.

He said the bill “gives the state a licence to kill the wrong type of people.

I am the wrong type. This bill effectively puts a price on my head.”

He told fellow peers that, if the bill’s scope was expanded over time, he faced “the realistic possibility, as a severely disabled person, of being killed as a result of legislation passed by [the House of Lords]”.

And he pointed out that no organisation of or for disabled people supported the bill.

Another disabled Conservative peer, Lord [Craig] Mackinlay, who became disabled in 2023, said he had found the “joyous, tear-flecked celebrations” by some MPs when the “unwholesome” bill was passed in the Commons to be “quite bizarre and chilling”.

Among his concerns was the risk of coercion, and he told peers: “I am professionally trained and licensed to do probate work through the Institute of Chartered Accountants; believe me, post-death battles over inheritance can get very ugly.

I am fearful of the coercion of the elderly and the vulnerable. It is so obvious.”

Baroness [Luciana] Berger, a former Labour MP and minister, recalled her shock when hearing a constituent speak of wanting their family member dead.

She said she had also not forgotten “the words and realities of too many former constituents: people isolated and abused in their own homes, sometimes for decades, in fear for their own lives; people who felt like a burden because of long-term illness or serious mental health conditions, especially the elderly; and people treated as though their lives were worth less because they had a disability.

Many were from low-income backgrounds, facing not only poor health but the crushing stress of unaffordable care costs.”

She was another peer to point out that there was “no organisation of or for disabled people in this country that supports the bill”, and she added: “In considering who the bill might benefit by giving them more autonomy, we must equally consider who it may harm by taking their autonomy away.”

The former Conservative minister for disabled people, Lord [Mark] Harper, told fellow peers that many of the disabled people he had met as minister and shadow disability minister were “profoundly concerned by what the bill will do to society’s view of people who have challenges thrown in front of them”.

He said the bill was “not supported by a single organisation in this country that represents disabled people – not a single one – and we should listen to their views and take them very seriously”.

The Liberal Democrat peer Lord Beith said: “I have this fear – this instinct – that this is one of those big decisions that society may one day regret. There will be no way back.”

Lord Falconer, the Labour peer sponsoring the bill in the Lords, told fellow peers: “One of the features of this debate was the personal experience that so many people have had of how, had that option been available, it would have ended terrible suffering.

That suffering is not often about the pain but about the lack of dignity and the profound desire to keep control, because that is what people want.

I believe, from my own experience and from talking to so many people, that having that option is important.”

NDY UK argues instead – with many other disabled-led organisations – that the bill risks embedding discrimination into end-of-life law, “especially at a time when many disabled and terminally-ill people still struggle to access basic care and support”.

Lord Falconer also apologised for not declaring in the first day’s debate that he had benefited from an assistant funded by Bernard Lewis – founder of high street retail chain River Island and a supporter of legalisation of assisted suicide – to support him with his work on the bill, and that literature he had sent to fellow peers had been funded by the pro-legalisation organisation Dignity in Dying.

25 September 2025

 

 

UN calls for human rights assessment of government’s benefit cuts bill and mental health reforms

Disabled experts from the United Nations have told the UK government to carry out a “comprehensive” assessment of the human rights impact of its universal credit cuts bill, further plans to reform disability benefits, and its mental health reforms.

The UN’s committee on the rights of persons with disabilities (CRPD) had previously raised concerns about the impact on disabled people of the Universal Credit Act, the mental health bill, and further reforms laid out in March’s Pathways to Work green paper.

It wrote to the government after being alerted to the implications of its plans by DPO Forum England and the user-led, rights-based organisation Liberation.

Now, after assessing the government’s response, and evidence provided by disabled people’s organisations, the committee has called on the UK government to act.

It says it should assess the impact of its reforms, and ensure – in “close consultation” with disabled people – that its future plans do not cause any further “retrogression” in their rights, following years of attacks by successive governments.

The UN committee calls for a comprehensive human rights assessment of both the Universal Credit Act and Pathways to Work, before implementing the cuts and reforms to disability benefits expected in this autumn’s white paper.

And it calls on work and pensions ministers to take measures to “eliminate and reduce” the negative impact of the Universal Credit Act on disabled people, and to carry out a full assessment of its impact after its measures have been implemented.

It should then – again, in close consultation with disabled people – set out a plan to mitigate the impact of the act to ensure disabled people have access to the support they need to fulfil their rights to live independently, be included in the community, obtain work and have an adequate standard of living.

And it says that government plans to scrap the work capability assessment must be “designed and implemented” with the “close consultation and active involvement” of disabled people, and that they should not lead to any further assault on disabled people’s rights.

It calls for action to ensure, after months of concerns about Labour’s plans to force banks to carry out mass surveillance of claimants through its “Orwellian” public authorities (fraud, error and recovery) bill – currently approaching its final parliamentary stages – that those banks are not able to access claimants’ personal and private information.

The committee also calls for a comprehensive human rights assessment of the government’s mental health bill, which has been approved by the House of Lords and reaches the report stage in the Commons on 14 October, to ensure it is “fully aligned” with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD).

And it says the government should improve its procedures for measuring the impact of new laws on the rights of disabled people.

Rick Burgess, co-chair of DPO Forum England, said: “We are grateful to the UN for recommending the UK government make a full human rights assessment of the impact of its social security policies, introduce mitigations to protect us from further harm, protect us from bank spying, and remind the government they should be consulting closely with disabled people and our organisations.

It illustrates again that the UK government remains hostile to disabled people, and evades its treaty and legal obligations, but we will not relent in defending our rights and lives.”

Dorothy Gould, Liberation’s founder, said she was “absolutely delighted” that the committee’s response “cuts right through” the government’s attempts to justify its mental health bill, and she praised its “vital” intervention and “refutation of the government’s stance”.

She said the government’s earlier response to the committee had “utterly failed either to acknowledge the continuing, highly discriminatory nature of this bill, or to set out any plans for the fundamental changes that are needed” and had “misleadingly claimed” the bill was compatible with UNCRPD.

And she said it was a “complete disgrace” that the government had “yet again tried to justify the bill’s continuing treatment of people in acute mental distress and people with learning difficulties, or autistic people, as second-class citizens”, and had “again tried to argue that involuntary hospitalisation and forced treatment are not disability-based discrimination”.

Gould said the government was also still failing to make the committee’s Deinstitutionalisation Guidelines “its baseline for ensuring that we can instead live independently in the community, just like anyone else”, while also claiming it was making good use of consultation with user-led groups and individuals with lived experience “in the teeth of contrary evidence”.

Asked if the UK government accepted the committee’s recommendations, and if it would act on them, a DWP spokesperson failed to mention the recommendations in its statement, although it insisted the government was committed to implementing the convention.

In its statement, DWP said: “We’re changing the welfare system so sick or disabled people have the opportunities to move into good, secure work and out of poverty as part of our Plan for Change.

The views of disabled people remain at the heart of our decision making, including through the consultation earlier this year and the Timms Review, which will be co-produced with disabled people and their organisations.

Our reforms will rebalance the rates of universal credit to reduce the perverse incentives that trap people out of work, while giving people the genuine support they need through our £3.8 billion employment support package.”

Asked if the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) accepted the committee’s recommendations, and if it would act on them, a DHSC spokesperson also failed to mention the committee in its statement.

Instead, it said: “The Mental Health Act is there to protect people when they are at their most vulnerable, and in many cases, it has saved lives.

But it is hugely outdated and has not kept pace with evolving understanding of mental health, learning disability and autism.

Through our mental health bill, this government is now one step closer to bringing forward the essential reforms that will transform the care of some of our most vulnerable people, providing them with more dignity, choice and voice.

The 10 Year Health Plan sets out ambitious plans to boost mental health support across the country so people can access the right support at the right time in the right place.

This includes ensuring more people get the support they need in the community, closer to where they live.”

25 September 2025

 

 

DWP is ‘dysfunctional’ and needs major review, says Lib Dem Steve Darling

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is “dysfunctional” and needs to be the subject of a major review, according to the disabled MP who speaks for the Liberal Democrats on work and pensions.

Steve Darling said his first year as an MP and as the party’s spokesperson had convinced him of the major problems within DWP and the “broken” social security system.

He said a review would need to engage with disabled people and others with lived experience of the benefits system, and academics, because the benefits system should be co-designed with claimants.

In an interview with Disability News Service at his week’s Liberal Democrat party conference in Bournemouth, Darling also raised concerns about the new work and pensions secretary, Pat McFadden.

He said McFadden appeared to be a “take no prisoners” and “driven” politician and an “enforcer”, and he raised concerns about his past comments about financial support for people with mental distress.

McFadden told Times Radio in March that he wanted benefit claimants with “mental health and depression and anxiety” to be “given support but not financial support”.

Darling also said that McFadden appeared to be a career politician who was lacking in “empathy and engagement and passion for people”, and that he seemed to be “a bit of a SPAD*-spawned apparatchik” who would “probably take no prisoners in driving forward with Starmer’s plans”.

He said he believed that the right-wing Reform UK was “worrying [the government] massively and I fear that they may lose their humanity for fear of Reform”.

Darling also said he had serious concerns about DWP forcing its disabled advisers to sign non-disclosure agreements (NDAs).

He said he and his wife had been forced to sign an NDA after winning a disability discrimination legal case and he said: “I really hate NDAs. They are meant to be there to protect intellectual property of commercial interests.

One of the things that we need to see change on is the culture of DWP and having a more open and transparent approach.”

He said that “slapping NDAs on those who they are engaging with” sends a “negative” message.

Darling also called for the Commons work and pensions committee to investigate the unreliability of DWP statistics on “economic inactivity”.

DNS reported last week that the proportion of working-age disabled people in England who are “economically inactive” was not “spiralling” and may even have fallen over the last nine years, according to new official government statistics.

The new figures came from the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities, just as a leading expert, Professor Ben Baumberg Geiger, from King’s College London, published a blog which showed that DWP’s “raw statistics” on all out-of-work benefits – not just relating to disabled people – were “wildly misleading”.

Darling said he was “keen to suggest” an inquiry by the work and pensions committee into the use of these statistics.

He said an investigation would “either debunk” the figures used by DWP or prove their accuracy.

He said: “My real fear is that, in our now Trumpian world, [the far right] don’t need the facts to add up to make outlandish claims.

The far right will just make up narratives for their own purposes and demonising others is part of their playbook and sadly people with disabilities and quite often people with hidden disabilities are in their crosshairs.”

He said that “unpicking” the claims and counter-claims behind the figures on economic inactivity should be “part of that push back against the far right that we need to be doing” because “otherwise that half-truth will be built on by the far right to demonise people with disabilities”.

*A SPAD is a ministerial special adviser

25 September 2025

 

 

Lib Dems insist they are still focused on social care, despite leader concentrating again on carers

Senior Liberal Democrat MPs have insisted they are still committed to social care reform and want to move towards eliminating all care charges, despite the party saying little or nothing about the issue during its annual conference this week.

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey focused again on improving support for “family carers” – he is one himself – but said nothing in his main speech about disabled people who rely on care and support, other than saying he wanted to see a country that “properly values care” and one “where we take care seriously”.

He mentioned family carers like himself 10 times in Tuesday’s speech, without once mentioning the adult social care crisis, which sees tens of thousands of disabled people falling into debt every year because of care charges.

Last year, Disability Law Service published research which showed that disabled people across England were continuing to face unlawful discrimination and inequality on an “unparalleled” scale due to “unjust” social care charging policies.

Earlier in the conference, Dr Danny Chambers, the party’s mental health spokesperson, told Disability News Service (DNS) that he was in favour of moving towards free social care.

He said disabled people were “inadvertently sort of being punished for having a disability because of the changes in personal independence payment and all that kind of stuff, so if it ends up giving people more independence and allowing them to live a much more fulfilling life, it actually ends up costing the taxpayer less anyway.”

At last year’s general election, the party promised to offer free personal care to all adults, although it would not scrap charges for other support such as housework, shopping, laundry and engaging with the local community.

During a Health Foundation and Ipsos fringe event, Dr Chambers said the party was “absolutely focusing” on social care.

The Winchester MP said that, at any one time, the Royal Hampshire County Hospital in Winchester had between 160 and 200 people “who would be better off cared for with a social care package than stuck in a hospital bed”.

But, he said, it costs more than £850 a night to keep someone in a hospital bed and only a fraction of that to fund a social care package.

This may save a council money from its social care budget, he told the meeting, but “as a tax-payer, you don’t care which silo it comes out of, it’s costing us £850 a night to keep these hundreds of people in a hospital bed that don’t need it.

Our mantra has been, ‘You can’t fix the NHS without fixing social care.’”

He said his party had been “genuinely disappointed and quite annoyed” that the new Labour government had so far placed “so little emphasis on social care”, including in the NHS 10 Year Health Plan for England, and the NHS workforce plan, due this autumn, and extra funding provided to the NHS.

He said: “None of it is focusing on social care.

They are pouring money into a leaky bucket, and if you do not plug those holes it doesn’t matter how much money or how much you try and reform other parts of the NHS, it means there’s always going to be this huge drain that means you cannot unblock these huge problems.”

At a question-and-answer session, also attended by Dr Chambers, the party’s health and care spokesperson, Helen Morgan, told DNS that she came away from a cross-party roundtable meeting on social care reform feeling “reasonably optimistic”.

The long-awaited meeting was held to discuss the work of the government’s Independent Commission on Adult Social Care, which is chaired by the crossbench peer Baroness [Louise] Casey.

It was attended by senior representatives from the Labour, Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Green and Reform UK parties, including health and social care secretary Wes Streeting.

Asked by DNS whether she was encouraged by the attitudes of the other parties on social care, Morgan said on Monday that she came away feeling “reasonably optimistic”.

But she said she made clear in the meeting that the Liberal Democrats believed that the timetable set by the government, which will not see the commission produce a final report until 2028, was “too late”.

But she said: “At least we had that first discussion, and we had that opportunity to point out the urgency of delivering.

It was an introductory discussion; it was trying to find the points of similarity between the different manifestos.

I wouldn’t say there were any particular breakthroughs in the first discussion.

At least we had that first discussion, and we had that opportunity to point out the urgency of delivering.”

Dr Chambers said earlier in the week that the government’s decision to wait until 2028 for the commission’s final report suggested it was “playing for time”.

He said: “We don’t need to wait until 2028 to say something needs to be done and then start the process of implementing something.”

At another fringe meeting, hosted by the Liberal Democrat Disability Association (LDDA), Dr Katharine Macy, LDDA’s chair, called for the party to do more to focus on social care.

They wrote the young carers motion to the party conference in 2019 which kickstarted Davey’s focus on carers.

And they told the fringe meeting that the party’s public statements on care can sometimes suggest that disabled people are “a burden”.

Dr Macy, a disabled person and carer themself, said: “There are times when it has crossed the line. There are times when it very much skirts the line.”

They said their party needed to be aware that there were more disabled people than carers, although the emphasis in its public statements also reflected a culture where caring is seen as noble and being disabled is seen as being a burden “and that is where we can start to change things”.

Dr Macy said the party needed to address its focus on caring rather than social care, but that the Liberal Democrats needed to do that by saying more about social care rather than less about caring.

25 September 2025

 

 

New publications ask how disabled people and allies can hold the state to account for welfare state killings

A new series of resources examines ways in which disabled people and allies can find ways to hold the state to account for the deaths of hundreds – and probably thousands – of claimants it has killed through welfare state violence.

The three resources are being released as part of the Deaths by Welfare project at Healing Justice Ldn, which has previously created a timeline charting 30 years of evidence linking the systemic violence of the Department for Work and Pensions with the killing of countless disabled claimants of benefits through state violence.

The Deaths by Welfare project has also produced an exhibition, podcasts, and more than 50 interviews with disabled activists and bereaved family members.

Healing Justice Ldn hopes the new resources* – written by Dr China Mills – will inspire activists to find new ways to secure welfare justice and work towards new, “life affirming” systems of support.

The first resource to be published, Deaths by Design, asks whether the social security system was actually “deadly by design” rather than being a system riddled with flaws and mistakes by DWP staff.

It points to the coroner who concluded at the end of an inquest into the death of Philippa Day that there were systemic flaws in the personal independence payment system.

As disabled activist and author Ellen Clifford said in one of the Deaths by Welfare podcasts: “They created a system that’s deliberately designed to push people into poverty because our lives are worth less to them than other people’s.”

And it quotes fellow disabled activist Rick Burgess, in another Deaths by Welfare interview, who said: “We’re now 14 years into this process; that’s not an accident, that’s not a passing fad – that’s a cultural democide against a demographic, that demographic being disabled people benefit claimants.”

Deaths by Design asks the question: “If systems are harmful by design then we need to campaign beyond ‘cuts’.

If we only mobilise around ‘cuts’ to welfare, we might overlook how harmful the foundation of welfare can be.”

And it concludes: “People want to build a different welfare system but it’s hard to get specific about what we want… when all we’ve known is a violent bureaucratic system.”

Another of the resources, Evidence, examines how disabled people and bereaved fam­ilies have produced evidence of state harm; how to use that evidence in ways that do not dehumanise disabled people; and how disabled people have used direct action to alert the public to this evidence.

It points out that constantly being asked to provide evidence of the harm the system is causing “mirrors the violence” of claimants being forced to prove they are disabled so they can receive the support they need to survive.

One of the questions it asks is: how many people must die through DWP violence before those in power listen and act?

The third resource, Accessing Justice, co-written by Dr Mills and Imogen Day – whose sister took her own life due to DWP’s actions and failings – examines how families bereaved by DWP killings have sought justice.

It looks at the experiences of relatives Joy Dove, Alison Burton and Imogen Day – each of them disabled people themselves – after the deaths of their daughter, father-in-law and sister through DWP violence.

It also hears from the mothers of Seni Lewis and Komang Jack Susianta, who were both killed by non-DWP state violence.

While Accessing Justice accepts that some activists want to see those guilty of complicity in the state killings face criminal justice, HJL also questions whether justice for those killed can ever be secured through the criminal justice system, and whether there are other ways of holding those responsible accountable.

*DNS editor John Pring was involved in editing the resources and was co-editor of the Deaths by Welfare timeline

25 September 2025

 

 

Mother left ‘disgusted’ by DWP’s silence over secret report into Jodey Whiting’s death

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has refused to release any information about a secret report into the death of a disabled woman, despite a coroner ruling that its actions had been the “trigger” for her suicide.

DWP has even refused to tell lawyers for the family of Jodey Whiting whether it carried out an internal process review (IPR) into her death.

It claimed in the letter that releasing an IPR to her family could breach her privacy, even though she died more than eight years ago.

It said IPRs were “internal retrospective investigations focused on organisational learning, not public accountability” and that they “often contain sensitive personal information about claimants, including health, benefit history, and interactions with DWP staff”.

It added: “The disclosure of such information, even to close family members, could be considered a breach of privacy.”

Disability News Service (DNS) reported in June that a second inquest into Jodey Whiting’s death – which only happened because of her mother’s eight-year campaign for justice and accountability – found that her “deteriorating” mental health had been “precipitated” by the withdrawal of her out-of-work disability benefits after she missed a work capability assessment.

But DNS also showed in June how DWP hid the truth from the coroner about its role in Jodey Whiting’s suicide, including by failing to confirm if an IPR was carried out.

Joy Dove, Jodey Whiting’s mother, told DNS this week that she was “really disgusted” by DWP’s refusal to release the IPR – or even to say whether one was carried out – after campaigning for more than eight years to discover the truth about DWP’s role in her daughter’s death, and for justice for her and countless other disabled people whose deaths were caused by DWP.

She said: “We were forced to give documents to the coroner, we had to do what we were told, so why the heck can’t they?

What’s the problem? We know she’s dead because of them. What are they hiding?

They don’t care. To them, Jodey is just a number. It’s not personal to them. They are not bothered.”

In the letter, a solicitor in the Government Legal Department – writing on behalf of DWP – made it clear that DWP “fully accepts the coroner’s conclusions” in the second inquest, and “accepts that the withdrawal of Jodey’s Employment and Support Allowance precipitated her deteriorating mental state”.

But further anguish was caused to the family by the Government Legal Department mis-spelling Jodey’s name in a brief one-line apology included in the letter, saying: “Please do pass on this heartfelt and sincere apology from DWP to Jodie’s family.”

Dove said she was annoyed at this lack of care and respect and said she did not consider it a “proper apology”.

She is now considering a complaint to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman over DWP’s actions and its role in her daughter’s death.

The letter came as Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, told DNS that he was hoping to use the government’s new Hillsborough Law to force DWP to release IPRs to relatives.

This is because Labour’s public office (accountability) bill includes a new legal duty on public authorities and public officials “to act with candour, transparency and frankness”.

In an interview with DNS at his party’s annual conference in Bournemouth, Darling said he wanted the bill to produce a “culture change” within DWP and the whole of Whitehall, and that he intends to ask parliamentary questions on how the release of IPRs will be part of that.

The solicitor for Jodey Whiting’s family, Merry Varney, from Leigh Day, said yesterday (Wednesday): “Joy has fought for many years to secure recognition that Jodey’s death was caused by DWP failings.

The second inquest into Jodey’s death confirmed that earlier this year and during the hearing the DWP witness was unable to confirm whether an internal process review had been competed following Jodey’s death.

Joy had hoped that a full and frank apology, together with disclosure of information about any internal process review, would come from the DWP.

The response indicates a continued unwillingness of the DWP to be fully transparent and to admit, in clear unequivocal terms, that their acts and omissions cause deaths.”

A DWP spokesperson said: “We continue to offer our sincerest condolences to Jodey Whiting’s family and are deeply apologetic for the misspelling of her name.”

The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, DNS editor John Pring’s book on the years of deaths linked to DWP, including Jodey Whiting’s, is published by Pluto Press

25 September 2025

 

 

Anger and frustration after DWP’s latest jobcentre announcement and McFadden’s ‘incentives’ comment

Sick and disabled people have raised serious concerns about the latest Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) announcement on its strategy to persuade more claimants receiving out-of-work sickness and disability benefits to consider moving towards employment.

Many reacted angrily to DWP’s announcement that every jobcentre in England, Scotland and Wales now has “specialist” Pathways to Work advisers who will offer skills and employment support to claimants receiving out-of-work disability benefits.

DWP said it has redeployed 1,000 existing jobcentre staff to provide voluntary help to people on universal credit who have “no requirement to look for work or engage with job help because of their condition”.

Disabled people highlighted concerns this week about safeguarding and the lack of evidence for such a strategy, and they questioned why a Labour government did not do more to focus on cutting NHS waiting-lists and addressing barriers in the workplace.

Their anger and frustration only increased when new work and pensions secretary Pat McFadden claimed in an interview that there were currently “incentives” in the system for people to declare themselves unfit for work so they can “double their money”, and also claimed that people were “declaring themselves long-term sick”.

McFadden will have been aware that claimants cannot declare themselves “long term sick” but instead must go through the harsh work capability assessment process in order to be found not fit for work, and he should also have been aware that this system has led to countless deaths.

Researcher and writer Sue Jones responded on X/Twitter: “Progressive, incurable illnesses are not ‘perverse incentives’ you vicious man, and no amount of lying about people and inventing ‘incentives’ and motives will change the fact that many of us can no longer work, simply because we are too ill and disabled.”

DWP said it hoped its Pathways to Work advisers would help 65,000 people found to have limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA) by the end of 2025-26.

DWP claimed this kind of “additional work coach support” was “proven to help people into work” and that research had found LCWRA claimants who accepted this support were a third more likely to be in work a year later.

However, the research it referenced, published by DWP in March*, showed the proportion of those in the LCWRA group in work rose from just eight per cent to 11 per cent, a year after the provision of “additional work coach support”.

The department said more than 10,000 people had taken up the voluntary offer and had had at least one appointment since April 2025.

It said it would not contact claimants with “the most severe and lifelong health conditions” – which DWP later confirmed will match the “severe conditions criteria” described in schedule one of the new Universal Credit Act – or those who receive support through the “special rules” for those with less than 12 months to live.

But there was significant concern among sick and disabled people on social media after the announcement.

Disabled People Against Cuts said on its Facebook page: “The question that’s in the back of our minds is, how long before it’s mandatory?”

Many warned that even a voluntary approach would cause serious safeguarding issues.

The anti-cuts grassroots group Disability Rebellion said on X/Twitter: “Here we go again – DWP are now going to ask thousands of UC claimants with no requirement to look for work to attend ‘work conversations’.

No thought given to safeguarding or how unwell this could make people.”

Another grassroots group, Recovery in the Bin, said: “We don’t need f*****g skills. We need healthcare, housing, enforceable legal rights.

Want to improve disabled people’s access to work? Make legal aid more widely available for disability discrimination cases.”

Others pointed out that such initiatives “barely make a dent in employment rates”, because the reasons sick and disabled people are not in work are not “lack of coaching, confidence, etc”.

Many suggested that the government would do better to focus on improving access to NHS services and investing in treatment for conditions such as long Covid and ME, and addressing discrimination by employers.

Similar points were raised by those who said the barriers they faced were not those that could be addressed by DWP Pathways to Work advisers.

One of those who responded to the announcement said: “I worked for Goldman Sachs, UBS, Deutsche Bank, Standard Chartered, etc over the course of my career.

I do not need more skills or experience. I am TOO ILL to work.”

Another said: “I’m chronically ill and mostly bedbound. I’m a fully skilled plater/welder.

I also have qualifications in carpentry, hedge laying, dry stone walling, and also have chainsaw licence to fell medium sized trees.

My problem isn’t skills. It’s illness.”

*DWP did not provide a link to this research in its press release

25 September 2025

 

 

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

MPs have warned the Government of a “showdown” over reforms to the special educational needs system they fear will cut support for disabled children. Labour members say they are gearing up to vote against any changes that “take away services” or “reduce support, financial or otherwise” for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities. Backbenchers say their red lines would also include children losing their legal rights to funding and provision – currently set out through education health and care plans: https://inews.co.uk/news/education/starmer-collision-course-mps-send-reforms-austerity-3930632

Trafford Council’s new council tax reduction scheme must be quashed after a high court judge ruled it unfairly discriminated against two “vulnerable” residents who discovered they had to pay the full bill when previously they had to pay nothing because they were on benefits. A judge ruled the council’s working-age local council tax reduction scheme for 2025-26 was both unlawfully adopted and discriminatory against disabled people and carers on certain benefits: https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/high-court-slams-obviously-unfair-32514179

More than 1,000 disabled children across the UK are waiting for wheelchairs and mobility equipment that could transform their lives, according to charity Whizz Kidz. The charity, which helps wheelchair-users up to 25 years old, has been forced to close its specialist wheelchairs waitlist for the first time in its 35-year history. It says escalating costs and squeezed NHS budgets are creating a “huge demand” for its service, leading to long delays: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2zwm8m41mo

25 September 2025

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

 

Sep 132025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Calls for an independent PIP review with UK minister under fire

A Welsh disability group is calling for an independent review of Personal Independence Payments (PIP).

Disabled People Against Cuts Cymru (DPAC Cymru) has accused the disability minister Stephen Timms of failing to properly lead his own review into the disability benefit, saying that “co-production is not taking place as promised.”

Speaking exclusively to LBC’s Welsh Correspondent Caitlin Parr, the group’s comments follow the Minister of State for Social Security and Disability, Sir Stephen Timms MP, meeting with the Welsh Government Disability Equality Forum on Tuesday 2nd.

LBC news reported that DPAC Cymru had long fought for disabled people’s voices to be heard in changes to welfare reforms, but were concerned that the minister, despite promises to engage widely over the summer, had so far left Welsh disabled people out of discussions around the review, outside of those forum meetings.

DPAC Cymru claims that Timm’s attendance at those recent forum meetings is “far too little and far too late for Welsh disabled people after months of stonewalling from Timms,” and said they were frustrated by “more promises but no action.”

Ben Golightly, from Swansea, is a coordinator for DPAC Cymru. He told LBC, “he [Timms] agreed in that meeting that it was important for Welsh disabled people and Welsh disabled people’s organisations to be heard. He was meant to talk about how he was delivering co-production. It was his job to do it. And he had no real update, because he hasn’t been doing that job.”

Despite promises from government ministers, DPAC Cymru say that co-production has not taken place, and they are “back to square one.”

Ben said, “We had hoped that after a major defeat in parliament that when he [Timms] promised co-production with disabled people, that we wouldn’t have to go through all of this again. There is so little trust in the way the government has treated disabled people that we need an independent review, led by disabled people, and Stephen Timms and the government should turn up and listen, but they should have no say over how it’s run because they’ve shown, throughout several months, that they’re unable to do it.”

Lee Ellery, an independent disability activist and lead press coordinator for DPAC Cymru, who has Cerebral palsy quadriplegic, agreed, telling LBC news it’s time more Welsh voices were heard.

Lee said, “people with disabilities, particularly in Wales, are left to the bottom of the pile so to speak, and we should be at the forefront of everything. I’m worried about what the result of the [PIP] review might come out to say, if the person who’s leading it doesn’t understand the whole process.”

LBC news reported that “the Timms review into PIP assessments is expected to conclude in Autumn 2026, when changes already decided on for new PIP claimants will come into force.”

DPAC Cymru’s calls for an independent review, made in an open letter released last Monday, has already received wide support, collecting 600 signatures and the support of representatives of more than twenty-five organisations.

Comments collected from respondents talk about their feelings of hurt, being “belittled,” “completely disregarded and isolated,” and the “harm and loss of trust” caused by Timms and the government.

Signatures on the open letter are open until the end of September.

Sign here

A notice graphic with a red tinted photograph of Stephen Timms as the background. Title text to the left of him reads: "We want an independent PIP review" with emphasis on the independent. A divider then separates the next header text that reads: "Nothing about us, without us!", followed by another divider. Body text then reads: "Please sign and share our open letter!" with an arrow pointing to a link: "bit.ly/independent-pip-review". The DPAC Cymru logo sits at the bottom of the screen.
Sep 062025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Trade unionists look after people at work and in the community. There are 1.4 million disabled trade unionists. There is a big trade union meeting starting Sunday and ending Wednesday called the TUC (Trades Union Congress)

That meeting is discussing lots of different things (motions) and voting on them. If you are a member of a trade union you might know someone who is going, called your delegate. You might want to talk to them about the following:

 

Sunday 7th, 1pm

National Shop Stewards Network lobby – The Old Ship Hotel, Brighton, BN1 1NR.

One of the speakers is from Disabled People Against Cuts and the lobby is asking the TUC to support disability motions. More info.

 

Tuesday 9th (scheduled late morning)

Motion 38 – Disabled workers oppose welfare reforms

from the

TUC Disabled Workers Conference

 

Tuesday 9th (scheduled late morning)

Motion 39 – Oppose disability benefits cuts emergency

from the

TUC Trades Councils Conference

 

See what’s being discussed

https://www.tuc.org.uk/Congress2025/programme-business-congress-2025

 

Watch live or recorded sessions

https://www.tuc.org.uk/Congress2025/congress-live

Sep 012025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

The words "We want an Independent PIP Review" in bold and black text, with Independent highlighted in red. On the left there is a tear-out effect of a greyscale photo of a disability protest, and a red-tinted photo of Stephen Timms, the disability minister.

This is an open letter from DPAC Cymru, produced with feedback from six Disabled People’s Organisations.

Disclaimer: DPAC Cymru didn’t have time to reach 100% agreed wording with DPAC UK, as we would have liked to. Even within DPAC Cymru, the letter wording is somewhat of a compromise. However, for important tactical reasons in Wales, we felt it was important to publish without delay. DPAC have therefore agreed to share the letter with this disclaimer.

Click here for the Easy Read version.

To:

The Welsh Government,

The Scottish Government,

The Northern Ireland Executive,

The UK Government,

1st September 2025

After a major, if partial, defeat in parliament over disability cuts, the disability minister Stephen Timms promised MPs that the PIP benefit review would be co-produced by disabled people and their organisations.

There is widespread skepticism if this will genuinely be the case. Promises to “engage widely over the summer” have not been met, and there has been no transparency over Timms’ plans for “ten people” to have “a lot of sway”. His comments reveal that he does not understand what co-production means. Timms has also repeatedly declined to acknowledge the many serious failures of the Pathways to Work green paper consultation process, particularly felt in Wales.

We counterpose this to the Disability Rights Taskforce, initiated in partnership with the Welsh Government, which brought together 350 stakeholders and 200 policy experts, as a model of what co-production can look like. However, many Taskforce participants were frustrated that much of their work was ultimately missing from the Welsh Government draft plan. This is a lesson that even co-produced policy will fall flat without accountability. Disabled people’s organisations must be given the necessary resources and powers to carry out the implementation and monitoring of decisions.

[Some of us] cautiously welcome[d] the announcement of the Government’s new Independent Disability Advisory Panel. This panel is separate to, but will feed into, the Timms review of PIP. However, trust remains very low, and the terms – of “up to 10” people – have already been set for us. [See update, below]

We the undersigned demand that:

• The new Independent Disability Advisory Panel must be genuinely independent, representative, transparent, and have real powers of oversight.

• The UK government must acknowledge its failures in delivering the Pathways to Work consultation and legislative process, as a precondition to rebuilding trust and ensuring those mistakes are not repeated.

• The PIP review must be independently led by disabled people and our organisations, inviting the views of carers, volunteers, and workers in health, social care, housing, transport, and welfare.

• Any review of welfare reform must also, in a process led by disabled people, involve trade unions as democratic organisations representing 1.4 million disabled workers as well as representing the workers responsible for the day-to-day delivery of services that disabled people rely on.

• The scope of the PIP review must be widened to all aspects of welfare and employment for disabled people, guided by the principle: from each according to their ability, to each according to their need.

• Dedicated funding must be provided to Disabled Peoples Organisations to support outreach, accessible engagement, and the collection of views from disabled people, including those without internet access or digital skills.

• The devolved governments of Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, and councils, should recognise and support this independent review even if the UK government refuses to.

• The UK government must immediately halt all cuts to disability and incapacity benefits for the duration of the review, and urgently fix Access to Work.

• Parliament must be given time to properly scrutinise any new legislation.

• The UC bill should be repealed. It is flawed, and was rushed through in an abnormal and undemocratic way.

 

[Update 4th September] Statement from DPAC Cymru regarding the “Independent Disability Advisory Panel”:

“The recently published terms for the so-called Independent Disability Advisory Panel, including the requirement to sign a non-disclosure agreement, are completely unacceptable. We are going to go back to a full consultation with all of our members and allies and take time for discussion to correct the weakness in our compromise wording of ‘cautiously welcome’ and come back united, realigned on the strongest possible response. We hope you will continue to support the demand for an independent PIP review, led by disabled people, and support this letter with your signature.”

 

For a full list of signatures and footnotes, see here.

To add your support to the letter, add your signature here

Here are short URLs for sharing the letter:

Non-Easy Read: Bit.Ly/independent-pip-review

Easy Read: Bit.Ly/easy-read-independent-pip-review

Aug 222025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

From Merseyside DPAC:

 

Join Disabled People Against Cuts to protest against the Labour policies killing disabled people outside the Labour Party conference in Liverpool 29/09/2025 at 12pm. We will assemble near the Wheel of Liverpool on Keel Wharf L3 4FN.

We encourage those who can to a mask in order to protect immunocompromised members of our community and will have some masks available for those who do not have their own. We ask that political parties do not bring branded placards.

#GenocideAbroadDemocideAtHome #WelfareNotWarfare

 

"Text over a dark background with the disability pride colours. Text reads "Genocide abroad, democide at home is Labour policy. 12:00 September 29th, the Wheel of Liverpool L3 4FN"

Beneath the text is an inverted black triangle with the text "DWP stop killing us" and a black and white photo of a group of protesters with a Merseyside DPAC banner.

Jun 272025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Dear Liz Kendall Secretary of State for Work and Pensions,
(For the attention of all MPs and ministers)

We the undersigned are trade unionists opposed to the Universal Credit and Personal Independence bill, designed to restrict access to PIP and to reduce the sickness element (LCWRA) of UC. We believe this is shameful anti-worker and anti-working class legislation.

We represent union members, advisers, caseworkers, officers, housing workers, work coaches, local government and charity workers, finance sector workers, and other roles who work with those on the sharp edge of the disability benefits system. Some of us are also disabled members or carers across our unions, with the double whammy of working in these organisations and being financially impacted. Over a decade of austerity has forced disabled people into even greater poverty, and these cuts will only exacerbate the underlying barriers and widespread discrimination that still shut disabled people out of the workplace.

Our experiences and knowledge of this sector can provide vital insight into the catastrophic impact the proposed welfare cuts are likely to have. The benefit system is already a punitive, degrading, and impoverishing system that has cost lives through assessments, sanctions, and disallowance of benefits. These cuts will only worsen that reality. Cuts kill – particularly as hundreds of thousands more are pushed into poverty.

Not only will these cuts cause increased financial hardship for some of those made vulnerable by a disabling society, but will also add considerable expenses and a much increased workload to workers in several sectors. This is because more people will be plunged into debt. More people will be served with eviction notices (as they won’t be able to pay their rent/bedroom Tax/service charges). In many cases, disabled workers will be faced with the possibility that they will lose PIP and no longer be able to afford to service the additional needs that enable them to remain in the workforce. Cutting incomes will push people further from work, just as sanctions do. This will create misery and resentment in addition to requiring further public services & resources.

The Disability Policy thinktank forecast that the cuts will lead to £1.2bn in extra costs for the NHS and local care services provided by councils, raising the alarm for both councillors and MPs whether the cuts will backfire even on their own economic terms.

More people:

  • won’t be able to afford food or bills, with 4 million already using foodbanks and limited or cut off energy supplies, whilst those industries’ bosses increase their profits off the back of us all.

  • will have their linked benefits stopped, including carer’s allowance and the carer element of UC, disproportionately impacting unpaid carers, women and children when child poverty and homelessness are already at record levels

  • will be excluded from work or forced into unsuitable work which worsens health, with many working families who rely on UC to top up poor wages also to be hit by the reforms.

Benefit cuts harm all working class people, increasing conditionality and forcing us to tolerate exploitative work and accept poorer terms and conditions. The scapegoating of benefit claimants intensifies division and competition and weakens solidarity in our communities.

Local government departments have faced cut after cut and already struggle to have enough staff or resources to support more in need. The voluntary sector has been needed to act up for several years to plug gaps due to Tory austerity, and currently struggles to meet demand.

Funding for debt advice has been reduced and there is insufficient support to help the current number of people with debt and advice.

Access to Work already sees delays of around a year for decisions to enable disabled people to take equal part in work. This is not being resourced as needed.

The proposed cuts by a Labour government will make all of this considerably worse:

  • It will further strain the already overburdened third and public sector. Staff stress will increase, when many already suffer anxiety and poor well-being in the third and public sector because of understaffing and excessive workloads.

  • Communities will be further demoralised and disenfranchised, or will turn to alternatives that do not represent working class interests.

  • The Trade Union movement should not only fight to defend the social security system from cuts, but also demand a transformative alternative that centres human dignity, regardless of ability to work.

  • DPAC and many others have argued for a welfare system that works for us all, removing the private sector involvement and its punitive measures.

With over £20 billion unclaimed, these cuts and the disproportionate targeting of disabled people do not add up. An FOI request found that 87% of those in receipt of the standard rate of PIP daily living, and nearly half of PIP claimants overall, could stand to lose out under the cuts – the scale is much more significant than the Government is letting on.

CPAG also estimated that the benefit bill has been held down by £36 billion annually as a result of caps, freezes and cuts since the 2010s, including the 2-child limit, bedroom tax and benefit cap. Means-tested benefits have been squeezed for over a decade, plunging people into poverty and worsening their health.

Our welfare spending is relatively low as a share of GDP compared to other European countries, even accounting for the increase in PIP claims, simply reflecting worsening health, increases in retirement age, and record waiting lists. Fraud in the PIP system is negligible. Amnesty have stated the inadequacy of benefits violates human rights, and that the system is consciously cruel – it does not need to be made even more restrictive. Civil society, third sector and disabled people’s organisations have been unanimous in their opposition to these ruthless cuts, with Citizen’s Advice condemning the reforms in a ‘Pathways to Poverty’ report and calling for them to be cancelled.

The proposals on unemployment insurance are a further mockery of this being about ‘making work pay’ – severing the link between national insurance credits someone has earned and their ability to rely on an indefinite sickness benefit if they become unable to work, even when made ill by work itself. The cuts are putting cart before horse: investment in employment support is set to have a minimal impact on getting people into work, with job vacancies falling and the Employment Rights Bill not yet implemented.

The consultation has been focused on a few of the changes, and Wales has not had an accessible consultation. That alone should mean this bill should go no further. The changes are being rushed through Parliament to make savings within rigid fiscal rules rather than improve work prospects, and MPs will not have had the chance to review the consultation responses before voting. At every stage the due democratic process and co-production with disabled people, as the Work and Pensions Committee has also called for, has been sidestepped. This concerns us all as trade unionists striving for a more equitable and democratic society.

Instead of balancing the books on the backs of those who can least afford it, Labour should be making the political choice to tax extreme wealth in society, redressing the runaway inequality that has seen the 50 richest families in Britain own more wealth (over £500bn) than half of the rest of the population. We commend the MPs that have submitted an amendment to Parliament to decline a second reading of the bill, and those who have pledged to vote against the bill. We demand that the Government withdraws these cuts, or the Labour Party will be turning its back on workers and working-class communities across the country.

Signatures: (add yours here)

Luke Dukinfield, Unite, Senior Workplace Rep, NEYH CYNfP RISC & Young Members Committee
Ben Golightly, Prospect member (Tech Workers’ Branch).
Arti Dillon Unite 524 branch CYNfP sector & Southwark Trades Council
Helena Navarrete Plana, Unite the Union
Amelia Bradley-Newby, Unison
Rachel eborall
Clara Paillard, Unite the Union, National Industrial Sector Committee (Not For Profit)
Irene McNally, Unite the Union
Clive Walder, Unite
Dara FitzGerald. Vice-Chair Unite Digital and Tech branch
Eric Segal Kent Retired members (SE100R1) branch committee member
Michael Agboh-Davison, Unite
Sean Brogan Chair Unite Community Plymouth and South Devon
Ben Goldstone, Unite LE1111 Housing Workers branch – Equality Officer and Workplace Rep
Jamie Sims, Unite, former workplace rep
Michael Harrison, Unite The Union, Chair of Unite Community Wales and vice chair of Unite Community National Campaign Forum.
James Clements, PCS
Rob Williams chair Unite LE/1228 branch
Charlotte Powell, Unison and UCU Steward
Joseph Meldau, Equalities Office, Unite the Union, Bristol City Council Branch, & a member of Unite South West Disabled Members Committee
Helen Dunster, Unison Representative
Alistair Tice , Unite Community member
Mike Moore, Birmingham University UNISON, Joint Branch Secretary
David Reid (Treasurer, Cardiff General Unite)
Vicki Morris, UNISON University of Nottingham branch secretary, Higher Education Service Group Executive
Mike Vaughan UNISON Branch Secretary
Catherine mcdonagh
Andrea Gilbert GMB Accompanying Rep
James Brackley, UCU
Ioana Cerasella Chis, University of Birmingham UCU & UNISON branch member
Gurbinder Gill, RMT
Steve Merriman, South Yorkshire Retired Members Branch
Mark Sage, Unite Community member
Sacha Ismail, UNISON, FBU
Jackie Lederer Unite Community Branch Secretary
Sally Heier, UCU, University of Leeds Branch Committee Member
Kevin protheroe
Millie Wild, Unite
Karen Drysdale, Unison
Tanis Belsham-Wray. Secretary of Unite NE/403/15 (Community, Youth and Not4Profit).
Tamsila Tauqir, UWE UNISON, Vice-Chair
Stephanie Tailby UCU South West Retired Members Branch
Sarah Horton, Unison
Christine Thomas, Unison
Rob Prince, UNISON, Branch treasurer
Serenity baskett, Unite the union, union rep, lgbt committee member
Jonathan Golding, Branch Secretary, Unite Community, Cardiff & Area
Deborah Butt ASLEF Branch Secretary and Union Learning Representative
Celine Petitjean, Bristol UCU, Membership secretary
Jamie Strudwick, member of Unite
Pauline Brady, Unison, Equalities Officer
Kevin Daws, Treasurer of Gloucester & District Trades Union Council, Branch Equalities Officer of Gloucester SW/007 Branch, UCU South West Regional Equalities Officer
VC – UCU UWE
Bev Keenan Unite Community branch secretary
Barbara Hulme, Unite Community
Sue Wilbraham, Cumbria UCU, Environment rep
Ajit Chuhan UCU Bristol
George Gray
Leisa Taylor, Unite
Ian Townson, Unite Community, Equalities Officer
Lee Starr-Elliott CWU Bristol and District Amal vice chair, equality officer and SW regional disability officer
Pippa Dowswell, Joint Secretary, Islington NEU
Elane Heffernan, UCU Kent Equalities Officer (and PIP claimant)
Eleanor Lisney, NUJ member.
Elizabeth Mawle, Unite
Gwen Vardigans activist Unite community
Katharine Johnston, UCU
Sandra Wyman Unite Community
Zarria Phillips Bristol & Glos area Unite Community
H.Benjafield
Stephanie Mulrine, UCU North East Regional Committee
Steve Jones. CWU Senior Field Official. Convenor Haringey Community Action Network
Matthew D Smith. UCU Treasurer, University of Cumbria
Mark Evans Retired members secretary Carmarthenshire County Unison and member of Carmarthenshire County Unison branch committee
Penny Foskett, NEU, retired
James Jackson Unite Community
Gemma Southgate, TSSA Executive Committee Member for Wales & Western Division
Mathew John, Branch Chair, Carmarthenshire County Unison Branch
Melissa Heywood, TSSA President
Trevor Jones (Unite the Community)
Kevin Pattison, unite community, chair Leeds, Wakefield & York
Samuel Coxson, Unite
Monique Buchli
Gary Clark CWU retired member former branch secretary
J. Losh, Worcestershire Unison
Andrew Kilmister, UCU, member of Oxford Brookes University UCU Executive
Cllr Alexi Dimond, Sheffield City Council, Unite – Not For Profit
Emma Cotton, Social Security and Tax Officer, Equity
Jeni Hunneyball Unite
Jane Carter NEU
Marco Tesei, UCU vice-chair West London College, UCU NEC UK-elected
Chloe Cheeseman, UNISON member
Martin Cavanagh, PCS National President
Saul Cahill, PCS NEC member
Lucy Burke. UCU vice chair, Manchester Metropolitan University
Jennifer Forbes, UCU branch Chair,
Bee Hughes, secretary LJMU UCU
Deji Olayinka UTAW-CWU Chair
Philip Furnivall, Unite, Bristol City Council Senior Craft Workplace Rep – Local Authorities National Industrial Sector Committee
Roland Rance, Treasurer East London Unite Community
Jade Brown, Unison
Amber Williams Unite, co. Vice secretary Bristol city Council branch
Pat Freeman; University of Cumbria UCU H&S rep
Rachael Tomlinson, Unite Community, Humber
Rada Daniell, East London Unite Community member
Ellen Robottom, Unite, former therapeutic counsellor
Fennelia MacCallum, City of Bristol College, LGBT+ Rep
Lisa Lonsdale (Prospect)
Sue Mew – East London Unite Community
Adi Kuntsman, Manchester Metropolitan University
Andy Mitchell, Unite South West Regional Community Forum chair
John Pearson, Unite Community member, former PIP and WCA support worker
Demaine Boocock, UNISON
Elisa Middleditch Unite
Alex Moore President Plymouth NEU
Jan Egan, GMB and Unite Community
Mark King, GMB
Carole Vincent, TULO East London Unite Community & delegate to Waltham Forest Trades Council
Duncan Davis, CWU, UTAW Branch Secretary
Doreen Mcnally. Unite the union
Jan Pritchard
Julie Connolly UCU
Robbie Woodland President BFAWU kernow (Cornwall)
William Kerr, UCU
Vince Martin, Greater Manchester Unite Community, former Branch Secretary
Eddie Hyndes, Musicians’ Union
Neil Terry NUJ
John Fones, UCU.
Tony Staunton, President, Plymouth Trades Union Council
Dave Robertson Unite Community Leeds Wakefield York
Gerry Lavery, Unite Community, Leeds, Wakefield & York.Branch.
Phil Maxwell, Unite Community (branch equalities officer).
Darren James CWU
Jenny Atkinson, UNISON, UWE International Relations Officer
Steve Wilkins Vice Chair Kent Unite Community Branch Secretary Medway TUC
Ryan Aldred Usdaw Assistant Secretary
Chris Bligh, RMT Trades Council rep
Catherine Hughes. Unite Community
Paul Grunnill Unite NW 567 Branch Secretary
Gareth Boyce Unite Union shop steward
Kate Hunter Unite Community
Duncan Moore, UCU National Executive Committee and Secretary of Torbay and South Devon Trades Council
Ian Hanton, Unite Rep
Lady Lola Oyewusi Unison
Mads Hodgson IWGB Disability Officer, Charity Workers Branch
Adrian Jackson Unison .northern regional disabled members deputy co-chair branch disabled members officer northern regional rep national disabled members committee
Scott machin unite member
Gordon Waring
Megan Archer, IWGB Charity Workers Branch
Andrew MIles, NE/COM/5, Unite the Union Leeds, Wakefield and York Community Branch
Miguel Saona. MMU-UCU. LGBT+ Officer.
Alan Theasby, Unite Community
Brian Lennie
Gail Ward Hands2Mouth Project, Unite Community
Cecile Remy, UCU, IWGB
Minesh Parekh, IWGB member (charity worker), Labour and Co-operative Councillor in Sheffield
Ross Maidment, Unite member
Laura Louise Hullah, Musicians’ Union, UCU
Open University UCU Exec
Liam Sewell, UCU, Nottingham College Branch Chair
David Eatock Unite
Patrick Shǐ Timmer, IWGB
Susan Pashkoff, Unite Community, Easr London, Chair
Cllr Jakob Williamson, Unite Member
Kat Down, Vice Chair of NASUWT Disabled Teachers Advisory Committee
Claire Rose, Unite member
Michelle Rogers
Janine Booth, NEU Disabled Members’ Organising Forum; Neurodivergent Labour
Diana Neslen unite the community
Cllr Stan Bates Wakefield MDC Unite member
Dean Darley, Springfield Allotment Community Klub Chair
Beth Wright – NASUWT
David Lowe , Secretary Wigan Trades Council
Steve Handford NEU. International Solidarity Officer.
Nick Parker, PCS, Department for Business and Trade Group Organiser
Kerry Wilks, Unite Community National Chair
Tina Harvey UCU Chair University of Cumbria
Jenifer Devlin Unite Community
Ros Garrick UCU
Addele Lynas NASUWT Belfast Association Secretary
Eeva Sointu, UCU
Sean Kelly Northumberland NEU Branch Secretary
Jon Woods, Portsmouth City UNISON Branch Chair
Elinor Hewitt, Unison LTHT Treasurer and Comms Officer
Claire Inglis, UCU, vice chair at UoC branch
Scott Inglis UCU Branch vice chair
Molly Holland, Unite
Jennifer Jamieson unison member
“Richard stallard
Unite community
Unite plymouth activist committee plymouth trade Council ”
Luciano Sgarbi, IWGB Game Workers member
Mark Blacklock, National Union of Journalists; University and College Union
Mary Currell, Unite member
Mark Fogg, Unite, Branch Officer
Alan Short Unite Community Sth Wales
Linda Burnip, Unison
David Kirk, UNISON
John Ingleson UNISON Branch Chair
Pauline Bailey Unison
Rachel Mills, UNISON Member
Valerie Jackson Unison Retired
Fran Amery, Equality Officer, University of Bath UCU
George Newth, Bath UCU
Alex Charnley, UCU postgraduate rep, Bath university
James Bonner, Unite Community Berkshire, Oxfordshire & Buckinghamshire Branch Treasurer
Caroline Corbin. Unison Health Branch Chair
Denis Bangura, Unison
Philip Bayes
Mark Toovey Lead union learning, deputyearly shift rep, CWU
Wolfgang Bailey. Workplace Representative and Welfare Officer for UNHAC Branch
Tam Laidler, NEU
Debra Willis, unison rep LTHT NHS
David Moon (UCU, branch caseworker, former Branch President, University of Bath)
Darren Robinson Unite The Union Branch Chair / Convenor
Paula Peters Chair of London and Eastern Unite community Campaign Forum & Chair of Bromley & Croydon Unite Community Branch
B.Mootu Unison Equality Officer H&S Representative
Darren Cogavin – UCU
Naomi Pennington, UCU
Stephen Hackett, Unite Workplace Representative, CYNFP RISC delegate
Jon Farley, Secretary, Unite Community Leeds Wakefield and York branch.
Mike Bird, Unite
Kev Conway Unite community member
Cecily Blyther, UCU, Chair at Petroc, Co-chair on Anti-casualisation Committee, member of Disabled Members’ Committee.
Dr Nicholas Lalvani of Unison
Daniel Edmondson, UCU, York St John UCU Branch Equalities Rep
Andy Richards UNISON
Jay Coward, Equity London South, Branch Committee
Richard Stanforth, Unite Union rep in a charity working to stop domestic poverty
Jemma Russell, Unison
Michael k usdaw
Nicola Jones Unison Steward
Dan Edge, Equity, Deaf and Disabled Members Councillor
Elizabeth Lawrence, UCU Regional Secretary Yorkshire and Humberside
Thomas Rudman, Unite LE127
Retired Members Plus section of Unite the Union Cardiff, Activist. Senedd Member for Scope since last September 2024, and an Independent for Cardiff North Labour Party and Activist within Cardiff Central and Cardiff North.
Cecilia Wee, UCU National Executive Committee, co-Chair Royal College of Art UCU
Steven Baugh, Unite
Lesley Bratty, UCU
Andrea Abbas UCU.
Paul Kershaw, chair, Unite LE1111 housing workers branch
Eve Miller, UNISON George Eliot Hospital Branch, Assistant Branch Secretary
Ellie Judge, UTAW-CWU, Tech Sector Support Co-ordinator
Dave Barter (Joint District Secretary, Rochdale NEU)
Kim Wheeler, IWGB
Michael Suter – Rotherham Unison LG Shop Steward and International Officer
Leon Highmoor-Bayes, UTAW
Kevin Ritchie, Unite, Cllr Bramley & Stanningley Ward Leeds City Council
Felix Ricketts-mason, UTAW-CWU
Derek Fraser Manchester NEU
Steve Skinner, Bradford College UCU, Green Rep
Graham Cooper, ASLEF Bletchley branch trustee
Graham Croucher, Branch Secretary and Union Learning Rep, Bletchley Branch
Morgan Rhys Powell, UCU
Bill Smith, Secretary Alice Arnold Unite Community WM5105
Russell Hickman, Unite Community Branch Chair, Northants TUC Chair
Judy White, chair Bradford branch of Unite Community
George Lloyd-Burman, IWGB (Game Workers) Regional Organising Officer
Sue Ghany Unite member
Natalie Amber chair of Equity Deaf and Disabled members committee
louise alldridge UCU Equality Rep
Steve Preddy Unite Southwest
Brett Sparkes, Disabled People Against Cuts Trade Union Group Founder
Ian Hodson, Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union National President
Jo Grady, General Secretary – University and College Union
Adrian Lister, Unite
Ken Fish, Unite
Ash Stokoe, UCU
Skye Cormier, Unite the Union.
Leanne Hubbard Unite the Union
Kevin Green Unite member
April Ashley, Southwark UNISON Branch Secretary & Black Members UNISON NEC (personal capacity)
Ian Clements, Unite LE1111 Housing Workers Branch Workplace Rep, LE Disabled Members Committee, Chair Hounslow Trades Council.
Matthew Watkins, UNITE
Ian Woolcomb
Rosina Siddique Unite Member
Liz Thompson Unite Community Leeds, Wakefield,York
Corinna Herr , Community Union , Caiwu Union , GMB UNION
Ailig Garth-Dòmhallach of Unite the Union (West of Scotland Community SC/100C9)
Joseph Jones Unison
Elie Sharp, UCU
Katie Reilly, Unite, VC of National Young Members
Stuart Hellingsworth, Unite
Matt Bridges, Workplace Rep, Branch Equalities Officer, NW DWC Committee Member, RISC (Finance and Legal) Disability Representative
Christina Malley, UCU Member for UWL, Former Chair of LIPA UCU
Shaun Topen-Cooper Primary School Teacher FT and Ley Local Secretary P&K NASUWT
Benjamin Cross, British Veterinary Union in Unite
Sandy Simmons – Unite – Equalities Officer
Mary Mullen UCU
Alison Campbell, UNISON, Steward.
Dave Nellist, Unite the Union and former (expelled) Labour MP
Polina Sparks, NUJ, Disabled Members Council deputy chair, welfare and training officer, Manchester & Salford
Justyna Borkowska-Rozanska, VMD, MRCVS, Unite, Reading
Mark Findlay, Unite
Ajay Kumar Bristol Palestine Alliance chair
Sharon-Theresa Calvert, Caseworker, NASUWT
Harry Stamp – UCU London Representative / Committee Member YSJ
Florence Allaway presedent of Haringey trade council
Neil Moore Unite workplace rep Peterborough
Paul Couchman, branch secretary, Surrey County UNISON
Damian Cosgrove, Chair, Unite Not For Profit SE Region SE/6290
Ruairí Lewis, UNISON Local Government Branch, Senior Steward
Jane Fernandes Unite the Union London
Ben Radley, UCU Rep, University of Bath
PCS ARMS Treasurer SW
Dr. Alex Marshall, UCU Hallam Rep
Steve Wright – General Secretary, Fire Brigades Union
Bob Monks, General Secretary – United Road Transport Union
Caroline Clarke, Unite, Sheffield
Sarah Boden BVU Unite member Liverpool
Harriet Knafler, Prospect, South Yorkshire
Ellie Wood, Unite London & Eastern Disabled Members’ Committee and Vice Chair London & Eastern CYWNFP Regional Industrial Sector Committee
Sam Dennehy, Unite Member
Julen Puertas Baños, IWGB, Bromley
Candice George IWGB
Alan Burgess Chair Portsmouth and District Unite community
Rowena Fehilly PCS ARMS
Dave Vincent PCS ARMS
Cllr Cien Elan Butler, Billericay West – Unison Member
John Sweeney Unison London
D Fearn Unison West Midlands
Cathy Meadows UNITE Nottingham
Chris Jackson
Brian Birtwell PCS Lancashire
Elaine Fullaway, Unite, Secretry, Southampton
Holly Notcutt, unite, Great Yarmouth
Michael Lehane – NEU member, President Coventry & Warks BPTU&AA
Gareth Bromhall, Secretary – Swansea Trades Council, GMB Wales and South West Regional Council, TUC Cymru General Council
Teresa MacKay, Branch Secretary, Unite Retired Members National Committee
Anne Boden Work Place Representative Unite the Union
Lesley Pollock, TSSA, Chair, West of Scotland Branch 850
Jacob Goddard, Unite
Tony O’Hara, Unite Member, London
Declan Clune. Secretary Southampton & South West Hampshire Trades Union Council
Jan Underwood, retired, ex-UCU, secretary Arfon Access, Bangor
Mick Morgan Unite N/W community forum chair Lancashire
Jamie Johnson, member CAIWU
Lesley Jones, PCS, Emp Relations Representative, Devon
Jenifer Devlin Unite Community Leeds, Wakefield and York
Mary, Liverpool Unite Member
Caroline Martin UCU Manchester
Zoey Corker Welfare Officer Leeds UNISON
Ekua Bayunu Unite Community Manchester
IAN LOVEGROVE, UK CITIZEN
Stephanie Spierling ARMS member
Dot Tomkinson Disabled members officer Salford City Unison and Co Chair of the North West disabled members committee.
Nixon Tod, UNISON, ex chair National Further Education Committee, retired member, Manchester
Adam Harmsworth, Napo National Vice-Chair
Marcela Leite, Unison Hackney, Green Rep
Suzanna Hudson-Cooke, Chair, British Veterinary Union in Unite
Pete Keenlyside CWU National Honorary Member, Greater Manchester Branch
Sarah Woolley General Secretary BFAWU
Hannah Fyson, UNISON retired member, Manchester
Douglas Stephen Pearce, Usdaw Branch Chair A216 Weston-super-Mare
Colin Carter, RMT, LDC rep Bristol & Area H&S rep Bristol
Louise Branch UNISON, SW
Nathan Lee Davies, UNITE, Wrexham
Steve Gillan General Secretary POA
Helen Thornton, UNISON Steward, Bristol
Jenny Lennon-Wood, Secretary of Dorset Trades Union Council
Joyce Rutherford, Unite Community member
Dave Murphy, Unite Community Teesside and Durham Branch Chair
Nick Caines, UNISON, Branch Chair, North Somerset
Nicola Kingaby RCN
Michael Braithwaite – Unison Member – Weymouth.
Lee Norman, ASLEF Branch Secretary and H&S representative, Darlington
Trevor Saint, Unite Bournemouth branch
Leigh Hodgson, GMB, Gateshead
Alison Hann, UNISON, Bristol LG
Lady Walker. Retired RAF Squadron Leader. East Midlands
Zeal Machin, BFAWU, Branch 547, West Yorkshire, FTW Representative
David Bird
Richard Holland, Salford City Unison Steward
Secretary of Unite retirement branch. Dorset and Bournemouth.
Jane Haden – Treasurer of Unite Community South Devon Branch
Jane Nellist, President of Coventry TUC and member of NEU
Siobhan Strode, Unite Community, Devon
Paul Hunt, branch chair, Coventry City UNISON and delegate to Coventry TUC
Linda Gates, Unite Community member
Julian Wilson, PCS, MoJ Group EC, Chair, Royal Courts of Justice and First Avenue House Branch.
James Foster, Unite Community, Orpington
Phil Watts – Branch Secretary Unite Northants Retired Members
Andy Hunter-Rossall, BFAWU member
Carole Vallelly GMB member
Stephe Meloy – Musicians’ Union member
Dave Levy – GMB London Regional Council
Michael Torrens, Unite, Equalities and Communications Officer
Mark Colpus, UCU
Dave Ray, CWU, Industrial Relations Rep & Chair NE Political Committee, Nort East
Dave Gorton, Unite LE372 branch publicity officer
Fredy Velez – BFAWU Rep Suma Wholefoods Branch
Stephen Brown, GMB & MU
Anna – FDA, senior policy advisor in Civil Service and enhanced PIP recipent
Jackie Owen Unite Community, Equalities Officer NE Wales
Lucy Fyson GMB member
Alice Tibbs, CAC Portsmouth
Jackie Lederer, Unite Community, Portsmouth and District Branch, S E Region
Kathleen Sowden unite south devon
Christine Wilson Bristol Bath & Gloucester branch Unite Community
Felix Manocha-Seymour, NEU Portsmouth
Lynne Batty, NEU, Leeds
David Kersey – Communications Officer- Coventry City Council
Peter ROBERTS, NEU, Hampshire
Stephen Lennon-Patience Unite Health member Dorset
Ben Willis, USDAW,North Somerset
Catherine Crowther Unite Community Member
Willow Tyers, NEU, Southampton
Heather Juno Libertine Rennie, Prospect
Naomi Byron, UNISON, London
Teresa MacKay, LE/2116 Branch Secretary, NRMC
Sarah Sanford, Branch Equalities Officer Suffolk Unite Community & former Welfare Rights Adviser Ipswich TUC UWC
Rebecca Short: Equity Union Member, Portsmouth UK
Mehreen Begg NEU Executive London
Pete Bloomer, Unite Community, social media officer, Birmingham.
Joy Bazeley, Southsea, Unison
Ben Jackson OT & GMMH UNISON Branch Secretary
Andrew Thompson, Unite, former national convenor CGL, Birmingham
Tim Cutter Unite 524 branch
Bee Tidbury
Nancy Taaffe, Workplace rep,Unite
Alexandra Summerson, National Education Union, Northern Region Disabled Members Organising Forum Rep, NYH TUC Executive
Des Merritt, treasurer, UNISON.
Mélusine Lenoir, London, Equity Member
Pam Wortley – Unite
Bill Smith -Secretary of the Alice Arnold Unite Community Branch Coventry and Warwickshire
Wyn Turner, GMB member
Hayleigh Marks Talabis, FBU East Midlands Regions 6 Control Rep & Political Organiser, Northamptonshire Control Branch Secretary & Northamptonshire Fairness at Work Rep
John Whittall, Unite Retired Members, Northampton Branch.
Chairman: Respect for the Unemployed & Benefit Claimants
Sadia Mirza, Unite the Union, Equalities Representative
Holly Donovan, National Forum rep for the East Midlands, Unite Community
michael jewkes, equalities officer tom mann branch, disability officer North Warks and Bedworth labour clp,
Moe Muhsin Manir – Unite Activist London, Former Representative
Jeff aherne independant
Claire Newland, Suffolk, Unite member – disabled.
David Greenhalf
Sue sanders NEU
Councillor Andy Wilson Unite Community Branch Liverpool
Debby Monkhouse, Unite member
Matt Pinnell West Yorkshire BFAWU member
Joanne Shaftoe, CWU North East Regional Chairperson
Carol Duerden, Unite Community Bradford Branch.
Jean Crocker, Unite Community and UCU retired members, North East England
Cllr Paul R Kimber Labour — Dorset Council.
Ruth Pitman, Dorset
John Shortell, Head of EDI, Musicians’ Union
Charlotte Bjorndal, UNISON – Leeds
Peter Ashmore, Leeds, Unison. (only working due to PIP payments assisting me to get to work. I will lose these and employment if changes go ahead)
Richard Tulloch, Unison, Leeds
Emma Emmerson, Unison, Leeds
“Mark Taylor-Thomas
Unison member, Leeds Branch”
Donna Padget, unison, Leeds
Amy Smith, Leeds
Kathleen Walpole – Unison member – local authority worker and DLA claimant – Leeds
M Kerr, Unison Member, Leeds
Sue Taylor Unison Leeds
Laura Topping, Unison, Leeds
Kimberley White -Unison -Leeds
Eleanor Hastwell, Unison, Leeds
Joseph Babalola,union member,christian,Leeds
Kathryn Russell, Leeds, Unison Member
Angela Stocks Leeds
Uyi Dickson & Yorkshire – Humberside Region
Dwain reid union west yorkshire
Lee Paton, Leeds.
Lee Paton, Unison, Leeds.
Ruth Armitage, Unison member, Leeds Local Government
Shirley Norman UNISON Yorkshire and Humber Leeds
Phil Marsden,West Yorkshie Unison
Jordon newton leeds
Freddie Found, UNISON
Farzana Kauser unison member
Joanne, unison, leeds
Ali Phillips – Unison Member – Leeds
Charlie Lowe
Eugene Okwei. Unison. Leeds. West Yorkshire
Dave Roberts, Leeds Unison
Mr Raafat Musa / West Yorkshire-Leeds
Matthew Hawkins, Unison Rep for Leeds Federated Housing
Charles Aninaquah Boadi,Unison Leeds branch member
Tania Boulongne, Unison, Leeds
Dave Roberts, Leeds Unison
Carol Spivey Unison Member
Mariam Boadi Owusu, Unison Leeds branch member
Richard Thackwray unison
Cheryl Ferris Stewart Unison member
Krystie Harris-Winstanley, Unison, Leeds, Otley
Cristian Robu Unison Leeds
Elizabeth Morrison, UNISON member, Leeds
Claire Ray – Behaviour Support Worker – Unison member
Izabela Zolnowska, Unison, Nursery Assistant, Leeds
Olivia Carlton, UNISON
Aishah I, Rotherham, Unison member
Barry barker leeds
MR MOHAMMED ASIM HARAF
Steven Elbourne , Unison , Leeds
Elaine Francis-Truett, Unison, West Yorkshire
Sari Sohanpaul Unison Member Leeds
Alex Moore Presldent Plymouth NEU
Nick Redding, Unison, Shop Steward, Leeds
Stephen Linnecor, unison , Leeds.
Rachel O’Gorman, Unison, Leeds
Luke Glossop, Unison member, Leeds
Martin Forsyth Unison Manchester
Pauline Bailey Unison Chair retired members Leeds
Kaal Rosser, Unite Community, -, Plymouth
Janek Poklad-Retired Unison member and former Steward
Steve dobie unison Leeds
Theresa Falkingham, Unison, West Yorkshire
Jasper Shaw, UNISON member
Irene Oriakhi Osunde. Unison. Leeds
Lulu Spargo, Unison
Simon Beaumont, Unison member, Leeds
Hanna Ayisi, UNISON, Yorkshire and Humber, Leeds
N Hadi – Unison Leeds
Alison Greenwood – Unison – Steward – Leeds
Stephen parsons Leeds
Ciaran O’Se
John Whetton, Unison Member, Leeds
Lorraine Bull unison Leeds
Andrew Sutcliffe, Unison, steward, Yorkshire and Humber
Mehnaz Ali, NEU, Disabled Members Committee member, Rochdale
Richard Tindall, Unison, Leeds
Andy silverman Leeds unison
Sarah Nattrass, Unison member, Leeds
Ann McKelvey UNISON ULR Leeds
NEU Regional Council Member
Angela Marshall Leeds Unison
John Vasey
Raymond Hill, UNISON, Leeds
Martin Tolley Unite member
Elaine Summerscales Unison
lesley greenfield unison
Ganiyat Mosunmola Salami. Leeds
Stephen Taylor, Woodlesford, Leeds
Natasha Clarke, Leeds
Mercedes Potter Unison Leeds Children Social Care
Keisha King, Leeds
Aliya Vasylenko, Unison, Leeds
Kehinde Adewale, UNISON member, Leeds
Matthew Lishman, Unison, Leeds
Bernadette Bidmead Steward Unison ( FE)
Jennifer Fairley Unison member, West Yorkshire
Tim snell unison still working at 68 from Leeds
Samantha Gill unison
Victoria Thain ex social worker Leeds
Lisa Jowett Leeds Union
Lisa Birdsall, Ls14 2hz
Mark Greig : UNISON : Adult Social Care, Leeds.
Tom Baker, Unison, Leeds City Council
Emily uden, unison,leeds
Michelle green
Jacqueline Clifford, Unite
Morag Cumming, Unison
Cynthia Harding unison
Sarah Wilson, Unite Member
Mick Heath Bradford
Danielle Steel – Unison Member
Lindsey mara, unison, Mental Health Homeless Team, Leeds City Council
Gary Murphy Yorkshire and Humberside Member
Yvonne Elliott Unison. Leeds
Nigel Jones – Shop Steward UNISON LCC.
Steve Withers unison
Lynn Gunnigle Unite Community Member
Jason Knowles = Leeds Unison Steward – Leeds Adult Social Care – Social worker
Richard smith Unison Leeds
Ushirika Quashie. Unison. Leeds

Jun 262025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Contents

Disabled MP who quit government over benefit cuts tells DNS: ‘The consequences will be devastating’ 1

Disabled peers plan to ‘amend, amend, amend, amend, amend’ after assisted dying bill reaches Lords 4

Minister finally admits that working-age benefits spending is stable, despite months of ‘spiralling’ claims 5

This bill opens the door to scandal, abuse and injustice, disabled activists say after assisted dying bill vote 7

Timms says cuts must go ahead, despite being reminded of risk that disabled claimants could die 10

Absence of disabled people’s voices from assisted dying bill has been ‘astonishing’, says disabled MP 12

Timms misleads MPs on DWP transparency and cover-ups, as he gives evidence on PIP review 14

Ministers are considering further extension to disability hate crime laws, after pledge on ‘aggravated’ offences 16

Making all self-driving pilot schemes accessible would be ‘counter-productive’ and slow us down, says minister 17

Involve disabled people ‘meaningfully’ from the start when developing digital assistive tech, says report 19

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week 21

 

Disabled MP who quit government over benefit cuts tells DNS: ‘The consequences will be devastating’

Disabled Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft has described how she was left with “no choice” but to resign as a whip over government plans to cut billions of pounds a year from disability benefits. 

In her first interview since releasing her resignation letter last Thursday, she told Disability News Service (DNS) that the four years she spent as a shadow minister for disabled people had played a significant part in her decision.

And she also made it clear that the backbench rebellion over the cuts is “huge”, with many of the critics MPs who are “normally very loyal” to the government.

That became clear on Tuesday, when fellow Labour MPs – led by 11 select committee chairs – published a “reasoned amendment” which “declines to give a Second Reading” to the bill, although this is unlikely to be selected to be voted on by the speaker.

She has signed the amendment, which is currently supported by 162 MPs, including 126 other backbench Labour MPs.

Foxcroft says she was taken aback by the number of Labour MPs who approached her on Friday to share their concerns about the bill, as she came to the House of Commons chamber for the assisted dying bill debate (see separate stories).

“Many have come to me to share their concerns, to say they agreed with what I had said in my resignation letter,” she says. 

“And some of these were colleagues that you wouldn’t maybe have expected to have expressed concerns. 

“These are not the usual suspects from the left of the party, these are people who are normally very loyal and want to be loyal but know the government needs to change this.

“I mean, I’m the same myself, but I was left with no choice.

“I don’t want to speak out like this but the government needs to listen, so I will use my voice to amplify voices that are being ignored.”

It’s clear from Sunday’s interview that if she had thought she could effect change from within government, she would not have resigned, but she made her decision to quit when the bill was published last Wednesday, and she saw that ministers had made almost no changes since March’s green paper.

The next day, she resigned through a letter to the prime minister.

In fact, as DNS reported last week, the measures in the bill were in one respect even worse than those suggested by Pathways to Work, because of the misleading reference in the green paper to a premium for those in the “severe conditions group”, which the bill shows will only be a premium for new claimants.

This was confirmed by the minister for social security and disability Sir Stephen Timms, when he gave evidence to the Commons work and pensions committee yesterday (Wednesday).

Foxcroft’s criticisms of the bill are fuelled by her own lived experience as a disabled MP, but also by the evidence she gathered from meeting hundreds of disabled people, including many representatives of disabled-led organisations, during her time as shadow minister.

“We all know the benefit system desperately needs reform,” she says, “but PIP isn’t and has never been about getting people back to work. 

“PIP is there to help disabled people with everyday needs. It’s an in-work and out-of-work benefit, and it’s wrong to deny support from someone who needs help to wash, dress, or use a toilet.

“The cuts will literally remove this basic dignity.

“I couldn’t vote for cuts that would make 800,000 people worse off, with 250,000 pushed into poverty, including 50,000 children. That’s a real human cost. 

“And these cuts don’t make human needs disappear. They just shift the costs onto already over-stretched services such as the NHS, social workers and unpaid carers.

“It’s a false economy, with devastating consequences.”

She says she also understands disabled people’s concerns – evidenced in The Department*, by DNS editor John Pring – about the many deaths of claimants, including an estimated 600 from suicide during the incapacity benefit reforms, when there were similarly significant cuts and reforms to out-of-work disability benefits in the early 2010s under the Conservative-led coalition. 

She is reading the book and is aware that safety and safeguarding must be a key priority with any reforms, because of the risk of unintended consequences.

During Sunday’s interview, she repeatedly stresses the crucial part played in her decision to resign by her four years as shadow minister for disabled people, leading up to last year’s general election.

She says her engagement with disabled people while she was shadow minister showed her just how badly many of them had struggled through 14 years of Conservative government, and she stresses her admiration for those she worked with, even those who “shouted” at her when her party did not go far enough on disability policy.

“They were desperate to see the change that a future Labour government would bring for them,” she says.

“I said as shadow minister that we would work with them to ensure that changes that affected them improved their lives, but that has not happened.

“These changes we’ll be voting on have not been consulted on with disabled people and disabled people’s organisations, and it’s so important to make sure that consultation happens and their voices are heard when such big changes are taking place.

“That is one of the reasons I resigned.”

She made the same point in Friday’s debate on the assisted dying bill – which she voted against – when she spoke of the “negligible” consultation there had been with disabled people about the legislation, and told MPs: “Disabled people’s voices matter in this debate, and yet as I have watched the bill progress, the absence of disabled people’s voices has been astonishing.”

She is hoping ministers will receive this subtle message: that government must engage with disabled people right from the start of any policy-making process that will affect them.

Despite several questions from DNS, she refuses to criticise work and pensions ministers, including Liz Kendall.

But asked for her message to the prime minister, she is blunt. “He needs to revisit it,” she says.

Despite that bluntness, and her high-profile decision to quit as a whip, her resignation letter makes clear that she is fiercely loyal to the government, but just intensely frustrated at the deeply harmful proposed cuts to the universal credit health element, and particularly to PIP.

She points to government policies that would allow people on out-of-work disability benefits to try work without fear of having to go through the assessment process again if it doesn’t work out; reform Access to Work; introduce disability pay gap reporting; and ensure all disabled claimants have access to a supportive work coach if they need one.

But she says: “We need to be doing those things first before we even start considering how we are going to be reforming disability benefits. 

“And when we do eventually do that, we need to make sure that we do it with disabled people and organisations run by disabled people.”

She also lays a large part of the blame at the door of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) itself.

She knows from her time as shadow minister that many disabled people have zero trust in the department.

“This bill is most definitely not the right way to persuade disabled people to trust DWP,” she says, “and certainly not when we’ve not worked with them to ensure that we get this right.”

Speaking on Sunday morning, three days after her resignation letter was published, she says she is finally finding time to think after the “whirlwind” media storm it caused, but she insists she has no feelings of regret, although she is sad she had to take the step she did.

“I’m sad to leave my colleagues in the whips office, who I think are absolutely brilliant and do really good work,” she says. 

But there is also a keen sense that she knows time is running out to persuade the government to back off, with the bill’s second reading set to take place on 1 July.

“I want to see the government change this. Desperately. 

“They need to listen to what I’m saying, to what Labour MPs are saying, and what disabled people are saying.”

26 June 2025

 

Disabled peers plan to ‘amend, amend, amend, amend, amend’ after assisted dying bill reaches Lords

The disabled peer who has led UK opposition to the legalisation of assisted dying for decades has pledged to work to make a bill passed by MPs so “tight” that only a very few people will be able to take advantage of it.

Baroness [Jane] Campbell said she believed that if the legislation made it easy for people to take advantage of the new laws – if they are eventually approved by parliament – then “people for whom this bill was never intended will die in their droves”.

She was speaking to Disability News Service (DNS) just minutes after MPs had voted by 314 votes to 291 on Friday afternoon to approve the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill, which will legalise assisted suicide in England and Wales for some people diagnosed with a terminal illness, in certain circumstances.

The crossbench peer, who herself has a progressive condition, said she believes her task as a member of the House of Lords – which will now examine the bill in detail – will be to “amend, amend, amend, amend, amend, so it becomes so tight that anyone would find it difficult to get it”.

She also said her task will be to ensure there is no “slippery slope” that will allow the bill to be extended to an ever wider group of people.

But she said that even if she and fellow peers were successful in amending the bill to make it safer, they were “not miracle workers”.

Baroness Campbell, founder of Not Dead Yet UK (NDY UK), which sees legalisation of assisted suicide and euthanasia as “deadly forms of disability discrimination”, said: “There will be mistakes and people will die, whom if they’d had the right support could have lived a good life until they died, but what else can we do?”

She added: “Why choose people like us to help to die when they can so easily put in support and care to help people live dignified lives at home so that they can cope with the bad times, and get through them.

“Because people do get through them and it is possible to have a good death with a progressive or terminal illness. This is what people forget.”

Her fellow disabled crossbench peer, Baroness [Tanni] Grey-Thompson, who has also spent years opposing legalisation, supports Baroness Campbell’s strategy.

She said: “There are very few safeguards in [the bill] currently. Very few amendments were voted on.”

And she said there was no protection in the bill for people with Down’s syndrome or others with learning difficulties.

Before the vote, Baroness Grey-Thompson told DNS that there would be many amendments proposed in the House of Lords, if the bill was passed by the Commons.

She said: “There’s so little safety in this bill, and so little understanding of the lives of disabled people, and the current government’s plans for welfare.”

Last week, NDY UK released polling showing that two-thirds (65 per cent) of disabled people believe that if benefits are being cut – as they are currently through the Labour government’s universal credit and personal independence payment bill – disabled people living in poverty may be likely to seek an assisted suicide instead of struggling financially.

26 June 2025

 

Minister finally admits that working-age benefits spending is stable, despite months of ‘spiralling’ claims

A minister has finally admitted that spending on working-age benefits is stable, and is not spiralling out of control, despite months of claims from his own department and fellow ministers.

Sir Stephen Timms made the admission as he told the Commons work and pensions committee that ministers had decided not to carry out a public consultation on the billions of pounds of cuts to personal independence payment (PIP) and the disability element of universal credit because of the “urgency of the changes needing to be made”.

He was giving evidence in the committee’s final session of its inquiry into the government’s Pathways to Work green paper.

Sir Stephen, minister for social security and disability, said that spending on PIP had risen in real terms from £12 billion in the year before the pandemic to £22 billion last year, which he said was “not a sustainable trajectory”.

But the committee’s chair, Labour MP Debbie Abrahams, asked if he accepted the evidence of Ben Geiger, professor of social science and health at King’s College London, who had told the inquiry that working-age social security spending had remained at about five per cent of GDP* for the last decade.

Abrahams also asked Sir Stephen if he accepted that the rise in the number of PIP recipients has been due to demographic change, the nation’s poor health, and the increase in the state pension age.

The minister replied: “Well, yeah, I mean, much of what you say, I completely accept.”

He added: “I think that working-age social security spending as a percentage of GDP isn’t much more now than it was before the 2008-2010 recession, but as you say, the share on disability and incapacity benefits is very substantially up.”

He said most of this increase was in the last six years, and that while the “incidence of disability” had risen by about 17 per cent since just before the pandemic, the incidence of “benefit claiming” had risen by 34 per cent. 

Abrahams suggested an explanation for this was that more disabled people were needing to claim PIP because of financial pressures.

Sir Stephen agreed, and suggested that the government needed to cut spending on PIP, even though disabled people were only claiming it because they were struggling due to the cost-of-living crisis.

He said: “I think you’re absolutely right. I’m sure that the cost-of-living challenges are a very big factor in what’s happened.

“The people who may well have always been eligible but have not in the past claimed benefit are now doing, and that’s what’s driven this very substantial increase.

“As I say, the current trajectory is not a sustainable one and it is not in the interest of people who depend on PIP for it to be on a financially unsustainable trajectory.”

Disability News Service reported in February that claims by ministers, opposition politicians and the media that social security spending was “spiralling out of control” were false and “ideological”.

Last August, chancellor Rachel Reeves said the previous government had “let welfare costs spiral out of control”.

In January, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) said in a press release on benefit fraud that it wanted to “tackle the spiralling welfare bill”.

And in February, in a press release on disability employment, DWP claimed again that benefits spending was “spiralling”.

*Gross domestic product, the size of the country’s economy in a particular year

26 June 2025

 

This bill opens the door to scandal, abuse and injustice, disabled activists say after assisted dying bill vote

Disabled people’s lives will be increasingly in danger because of MPs’ failure to understand the risks posed by the assisted dying bill, devastated activists warned on Friday after the legislation was approved by the House of Commons.

Disabled activists had started gathering outside parliament at 6.30am last Friday in preparation for a crucial debate on the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill before a vote that determined whether it passed to the Lords.

The bill was eventually passed by the Commons by 314 votes to 291 on Friday afternoon, although disabled MPs strongly opposed the legislation (see separate story).

Before the vote, supporters of Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) and Not Dead Yet UK (NDY UK) held up traffic in front of the House of Commons with a last-minute direct action, accompanied by chants of “we are not… dead yet”. 

Author and activist Ellen Clifford, who has helped lead disabled people’s opposition to the bill over the last year, said she trusted the Lords to improve the bill more than MPs, some of whom she said had acted on “naked ambition” and the principle of assisted dying, rather than what was in the bill.

She said she hoped the bill’s passage through the Lords would improve the safeguards and provide opportunities “to show what a shambles the bill is”.

Among those disabled people outside the Commons was musician and activist John Kelly, who said after the vote was announced: “The truth is, our voices haven’t been listened to. 

“What this does is open the door for injustice. 

“To rely on a panel to decide my life of social workers, and psychiatrists, have you not read how many injustices and mistakes those people have made, how much abuse and how many rights have been denied disabled people?

“And what they have done is open the door to allow in yet more scandals, yet more abuse.”

Disabled activist Anna Landre told Disability News Service (DNS): “A lot of us are scared about the prospect of enshrining a state-funded ability to die when we don’t have properly-funded state services to live with dignity, let alone to thrive, let alone to get disabled people into work, like this government claims it wants to do.”

She said: “I most certainly don’t feel safer now.

“I think it’s going to create an atmosphere for disabled people that is increasingly unsafe, when our services are being stripped from us, when we’re going to have to fight even harder to get the basics, the scraps that we can already barely access and now in any medical, in any doctor’s office we enter, we face the prospect of being offered a death, of being offered [an assisted suicide].”

She said it was particularly unsafe for disabled people who face multiple marginalisations, including disabled women, who are more likely to be in an abusive relationship; disabled people of colour, who are more likely to be doubted by their medical practitioners; and disabled people of low socio-economic status, “who are looking at not being able to pay rent next month”. 

She added: “As a disabled woman, I’ve been trying to access a cervical cancer screening for over two years. 

“I wish this government would work on that rather than working on streamlining my access to suicide.”

Another leading activist, Simone Aspis, said that, as a disabled woman with learning difficulties, it was “a very sad day for our community”.

She said the bill was “really, really dangerous”.

She said she believed that, for her and other people with learning difficulties, assisted dying will become the “de facto” treatment option given to them by doctors.

She said: “The government keep saying that there is not enough money to go around, so we are going to spend money on creating an assisted dying service? 

“Where is this money going to be found? It’s going to be taken away from education, from care, from housing, from anything that supports us to have good lives.”

Aspis also pointed out that people with learning difficulties had been “excluded from this debate” because the bill had not been made available in easy read. 

Dermot Devlin, co-founder of DPAC Northern Ireland, said that, with the government’s cuts to disability benefits coming in, it was “a dangerous country now if you’re disabled… but we will keep fighting back.”

Chelsea Roff, a researcher and founder of the US-based charity Eat Breathe Thrive, who has fought for months to alert MPs to the risks the bill poses to people with eating disorders, said: “I’ve spent the last six months trying to raise awareness about this loophole, and hundreds of experts have warned parliament: charities, people with eating disorders, physicians, doctors, lawyers…

“I did that because I thought it was the right thing to do because I thought if MPs understood the evidence, they would act on it and amend the bill.

“I’m really disappointed and I think the evidence was minimised, it was dismissed, it was not meaningfully engaged with.”

Michael Lorimer, from DPAC Northern Ireland, said he was concerned that the bill gave ministers “massive executive powers”.

He said: “Given what they’re doing on benefit cuts, we can’t trust them to represent our best interests in terms of implementing this legislation. 

“It’s getting to the stage where Labour are a clear and present danger to disabled people’s lives here because of the benefit cuts and because this bill has gone through, giving them almost unlimited powers in terms of how they shape this legislation. 

“And they’ve been clear through the benefit cuts that they don’t value our lives.”

Jason de Souza said he believed the new law would be “a catalyst for a much wider agenda against disabled and vulnerable people, especially people who are in a situation where they need palliative care and support”.

Earlier, disabled activists had gathered nearby to share their final thoughts before the vote, after months of campaigning.

Devlin had told fellow protesters: “As a disabled person, this assisted dying bill breaks my heart. It terrifies me. 

“It tells me that my life, already pushed to the margins, already made harder by endless cuts and cruelty is… now disposable, it [turns] the language of choice and dignity into something darker.

“I want to live, I deserve to live, but this bill makes it clear to them that lives like mine are just too expensive to bother saving.”

The disabled crossbench peer Baroness [Tanni] Grey-Thompson fought back tears as she thanked disabled activists for attending the protest “despite the discrimination they face in their daily lives and inaccessible public transport”.

She said there was “so little safety in this bill, and so little understanding of the lives of disabled people, and the current government’s plans for welfare”.

Kevin Caulfield, former chair of Hammersmith and Fulham Coalition Against Cuts, said: “The bill, and what is happening with the universal credit and personal independence payment bill, really indicates disabled people’s position in society, because we have been sidelined all the way through this process. 

“People with life-limiting illnesses are disabled people and that’s in practice and in law and yet they have successfully managed to portray this bill as having very little to do with disabled people, and that’s a f*****g disgrace and it’s disgusting and the same is happening with the benefit cuts.”

Caulfield was given a terminal diagnosis 28 years ago, and says he “might well have decided to take the option” of an assisted death if it was available then “because I was a newly disabled person, I didn’t have access to other disabled people, I had no access to mental health support, and it may well have seemed like a reasonable option”.

But he said he was “still here 28 years later”, and there were “going to be many people in a similar situation to me, tens of thousands of people that will end up being dead as a by-product of this legislation”.

Disabled actor, writer and activist Liz Carr, said the number of disabled activists who had attended the protest was “amazing” in the context of spending cuts and “the struggle to survive”.

She told fellow activists: “You make me know that we’re right and that even if this goes through today and goes through to the Lords, we just keep going there because we know where this goes, we know what it means, we know how it will impact our community and other communities.”

Paula Peters, who had been the first to start the protest, at 6.30am outside parliament, said: “Whatever the outcome, we keep going, and we keep fighting, and we keep resisting… and we are not dead yet.”

Jamie McCormack, another disabled activist who refused to accept defeat, said: “We will fight on, we will fight for assistance to live, not to die. 

“We will fight to our very last dying breath.”

And George Fielding told fellow activists: “Our most precious public services, and the things on which we all rely, rely on doing no harm. 

“This bill will do harm; its very premise is to kill people, it’s a pre-designed process. 

“We are on the right side of history, always have been, and the resistance starts as soon as we hear the result today.”

26 June 2025

 

Timms says cuts must go ahead, despite being reminded of risk that disabled claimants could die

The minister for social security and disability has insisted that billions of pounds a year of cuts to disability benefits must go ahead, despite the risk that they will once again cause countless deaths of disabled claimants.

Sir Stephen Timms was giving evidence yesterday (Wednesday) to the Commons work and pensions committee about plans to cut billions of pounds a year from spending on personal independence payment (PIP) and the disability element of universal credit.

He was giving evidence to the committee’s final session of its inquiry into the government’s Pathways to Work green paper.

The first question he was asked, by committee chair Debbie Abrahams, was about the health impact of the cuts on disabled people, and whether the planned new employment support and jobs would be available by the time the government begins to implement the cuts next year.

She highlighted how research in 2015 by academics at Liverpool and Oxford universities showed the reassessment of disabled people on incapacity benefit through the work capability assessment was linked to about 600 suicides between 2010 and 2013.

Unpublished research also showed how cuts in 2017 – of nearly £30 a week to payments to new claimants of employment and support allowance who were placed in the work-related activity group (WRAG) – were associated with 130,000 “new onset mental health conditions”, she said.

Conservative ministers were ridiculed when they first announced the 2017 cuts and argued that they would “incentivise” those in the WRAG to find work.

Abrahams had already asked Sir Stephen what estimates the government had made of the impact the bill would have on health, in the light of these two pieces of research, at work and pensions questions on Monday.

He said on Monday that the Department for Work and Pensions was “working very closely with the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure that the health and care needs of people who lose benefits as a result of this process are met”.

And when asked again yesterday about the risk of harm caused by the bill, Sir Stephen said the government needed to make sure that both “employment support” and “health and care support” were in place when the cuts were implemented.

He said that new investment in infrastructure and jobs would be “coming into place” in the next few years, and with “what we are proposing on all of those fronts that we will be seeing the progress that we need”.

He added: “I don’t think it would be a viable option to say, well, we’re kind of not going to do anything about the health and disability benefits for a few years and see how things go.” 

The minister was also asked by Liberal Democrat MP John Milne about government plans to halve the health element for new claimants of universal credit next year from £97 per week in 2024-25 to £50 per week in 2026-27, and to freeze it at £97 for existing claimants from 2026-27.

Sir Stephen claimed there was a “very big incentive” for disabled people to “seek to be classified” as having limited capability for work and work-related activity (LCWRA), and so eligible for the health element top-up.

He said: “If they are classified as LCWRA they get a premium which is worth more than the universal credit standard allowance, and that is unavoidably a massive magnet for people.”

He pointed to a letter he had seen in which an MP’s disabled constituent had said that being classified as LCWRA – rather than as having limited capability for work – would mean they would be paid £400 a month more, which would mean they would be “comfortable”.

But Sir Stephen Timms appeared to suggest that a disabled person being financially “comfortable” on benefits was a bad thing.

He said: “And I think this is a really serious flaw in the current system, that it presents this sort of LCWRA status as a sort of something to aim for, that ‘if only I could get to that, I would be comfortable’, when the system should not be doing that to people.

“That is a very bad feature of the current system. 

“What the system should be doing is encouraging people to aspire to work and providing the support to make work possible and feasible, and so, yeah, we are wanting to substantially reduce that incentive.”

He said this would partly be done by raising the standard allowance of universal credit by £5 a week, as well as reducing the health element.

But Milne suggested that the government was concentrating on “Treasury first, needs second”, when what it should be doing was focusing on “needs first, Treasury second”.

26 June 2025

 

Absence of disabled people’s voices from assisted dying bill has been ‘astonishing’, says disabled MP

Disabled MPs have voted overwhelmingly against the assisted dying bill, and warned that it poses a clear danger to disabled people if it eventually becomes law.

Although the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill was passed by the Commons by 314 votes to 291 on Friday afternoon, disabled MPs strongly opposed the bill.

By Disability News Service (DNS) calculations, those MPs who have publicly self-described as disabled people voted against the bill by seven to one.

Disabled MPs who voted against the bill were Labour’s Jen Craft, Marsha de Cordova, Vicky Foxcroft, Liam Conlon, Emma Lewell and Marie Rimmer, and Liberal Democrat Steve Darling.

The only disabled MP who voted for the bill was Marie Tidball, who spoke repeatedly in favour of the legislation during its committee stage, and whose support has likely persuaded some wavering MPs of its safety. 

Of the eight disabled MPs, only Craft and Foxcroft spoke in Friday’s debate.

Craft told fellow MPs that their vote would have “real-world consequences”.

She warned that the medical establishment placed a lesser value on disabled people’s lives, and revealed that when told of her daughter’s Down’s syndrome when she was pregnant, “the first thing the midwife said to me after ‘I’m so sorry’ was, ‘I can book you a termination within 48 hours.’”

She said she could not support the bill “because we cannot legislate against discrimination and we cannot legislate out inherent bias”, and the bill did not have “the adequate safeguards in place”.

She said: “We have been told that there are panels that will provide a safeguard and take into account all of someone’s circumstances, and whether they have capacity. 

“However, those panels may in exceptional circumstances – the bill does not set out what those are – opt not to even meet the person whom they are discussing. 

“We know that the panels do not allow for family members and carers and those who know that person – if they have limited capacity, a learning disability or are unable to make certain decisions themselves – to play a role in that process or have any right of appeal.”

Craft said it was not the job of MPs to send a flawed bill to the Lords and then “out into the world, hoping that others will do our job for us and that it will all just come out in the wash”.

She said: “That is a dereliction of our duty as members of parliament. 

“If you have any concerns about this bill, now is the time to vote against it. You must do that. 

“You must not think that someone else will do your job for you. It is our decision.”

Foxcroft, who was speaking a day after resigning as a government whip over her concerns about the government’s disability benefit cuts, said she had previously been in favour of legalisation.

But she said that her four years as shadow minister for disabled people, during which she spoke to hundreds of disabled people and their organisations, showed they were “extremely fearful of assisted dying”.

She pointed to the huge numbers of disabled people who died during the pandemic, and those who had “do not attempt resuscitation” notices placed on their health records without their knowledge, which “made them fear for their lives”.

She said: “It made them fear that the authorities thought that their lives were worth less. It also made them fearful of what would happen if assisted dying was brought forward.”

She said disabled people “need the health and social care system fixing first” and “want us as parliamentarians to assist them to live, not to die”.

She said: “Disabled people’s voices matter in this debate, and yet as I have watched the bill progress, the absence of disabled people’s voices has been astonishing. 

“They have wanted to engage. Indeed, they have been crying out to be included, yet the engagement has been negligible. 

“I believe that only one disabled people’s organisation was given the opportunity to provide [oral] evidence to the committee.”

She also pointed to the failure to provide the bill in accessible formats, including easy read and British Sign Language.

She told MPs: “I will finish by saying that I am not opposed to the principle of assisted dying, but until we have a system that supports the right to life, I cannot support it. 

“Until we ensure that all safeguards are in place, I cannot support it. 

“And until the vast majority of disabled people and their organisations support the legislation that is being brought forward, I cannot support it.”

She added: “We are not voting on principles today. 

“This is real and we have to protect those people who are susceptible to coercion, who already feel like society does not value them, who often feel like a burden to the state, society and their family.”

26 June 2025

 

Timms misleads MPs on DWP transparency and cover-ups, as he gives evidence on PIP review

The social security and disability minister has misled MPs after suggesting he has ushered in a new era of openness and transparency in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

Sir Stephen Timms told members of the work and pensions committee yesterday (Wednesday) that DWP was being “much more open” than under successive Conservative-led governments.

He had been asked by the committee’s chair, Labour MP Debbie Abrahams, about the review of personal independence payment (PIP) that he will shortly be leading. 

He was giving evidence to the committee’s final session of its inquiry into the government’s Pathways to Work green paper, which will see billions of pounds a year cut from disability benefits.

Abrahams highlighted how the department had previously failed to share its own secret reviews into deaths linked to the benefits system with independent experts commissioned by ministers.

Disability News Service had exposed how the department failed to share both peer reviews – now known as internal process reviews (IPRs) – and coroners’ reports with the experts commissioned to review the work capability assessment between 2010 and 2014.

Abrahams asked Sir Stephen to reassure the committee that data on deaths associated with PIP assessments would be available to whoever led the review.

He told the committee: “I’ll be undertaking the review, so yes, the information will be available to me, and actually, you know, we are being – not least thanks to your work, chair – much, much more open about all of this now than was the case in the past.”

He said the department “want people to see what’s going on”. 

He said: “There isn’t any benefit for the department in hiding these things. 

“They were hidden too often in the past. And I think that’s one reason why the trust in the department deteriorated so badly, because people can see that things were being covered up and hidden and it shouldn’t have been happening.

“And I’m determined that it won’t happen in the future.”

But despite his comments, the department is continuing to hide crucial information about deaths linked to the disability benefits system.

This week, Disability News Service (DNS) submitted written evidence to DWP’s safeguarding review to highlight how DWP was still hiding crucial information that would expose its past actions and failings.

Last month, DNS reported how DWP had unlawfully failed to respond to a freedom of information request to see a secret “critical friend” paper from 2021 on the department’s safeguarding failures.

It is also continuing to refuse to release recommendations made by IPRs following deaths linked to universal credit, dating back as far as 2020.

DWP is also appealing a decision made by the information commissioner that the department should release to DNS “a paper detailing the impact of errors on vulnerable customers” that was discussed at the 12 October 2022 meeting of the department’s serious case panel. 

And the department is continuing to refuse to release a transcript of a training session on human rights law given to DWP staff employed on working-age benefits. 

These are just some of the reports being hidden by DWP; there are likely to be countless other reports and data being kept from other disabled campaigners and allies.

Sir Stephen said he hoped the terms of reference for the PIP review would be released before MPs rise for their summer recess on 22 July.

26 June 2025

 

Ministers are considering further extension to disability hate crime laws, after pledge on ‘aggravated’ offences

The government is considering whether to strengthen disability hate crime laws even further, after ministers agreed to make a long-awaited improvement that will mean longer sentences for offenders.

Home Office minister Diana Johnson announced last week that the government would act to extend the law so that standalone “aggravated offences” would 

apply to disability hate crime and hate crime motivated by sexual orientation or transgender identity.

She said the government would add an amendment to the crime and policing bill to make this change when it reached its committee stage in the House of Lords, keeping a pledge made in Labour’s general election manifesto last year.

This would mean an offender could be charged with an offence – such as assault, harassment or criminal damage – that was aggravated by hostility towards a disabled person, and they would then face a tougher sentence if convicted.

At present, aggravated offences only apply to racial and religious hostility, and a disability hate crime can only be addressed by a court during sentencing, where the sentence can be increased if prosecutors can prove the offence was motivated by disability-related hostility.

The move was proposed in an amendment to the crime and policing bill by Labour’s Rachel Taylor, who told fellow MPs last week that the current discrepancy “cannot be right”. 

She said: “We cannot say, as a society, that some forms of hatred are more evil than others.”

The amendment was supported by disabled Labour MP Marie Tidball, who said the “opportunity to legislate to strengthen the law on hate crime offences must be seized”.

Disabled campaigners have been calling for the change for more than a decade.

But one leading campaigner said the government needed to go much further.

The aggravated offences change was recommended by the Law Commission in December 2021, but it also made two other key recommendations to strengthen disability hate crime laws.

It called for existing offences of stirring up hatred, which only apply to race and religion, to be extended to disabled and LGBT+ victims.

And the Law Commission also said an offender should be found guilty of a disability hate crime offence if they had been “motivated” by “hostility or prejudice” towards disabled people, rather than – at present – only by hostility.

Dr David Wilkin, a disabled activist, researcher, author* and support worker for survivors of disability hate crime, welcomed the move to extend aggravated offences.

But he was critical of the continuing refusal – following years of resistance from Conservative governments – to implement the two other Law Commission recommendations.

He said: “Now, with the perfect opportunity to bring disabled people into the 21st century by establishing legislative equality, they are choosing once again to make sure that disabled people are treated differently, with their hopes and needs once again relegated. 

“Hate crime campaigners have looked forward to disabled people being offered the same rights as other protected groups in new legislation. 

“But now, having reached this timely and convenient critical moment, the Labour government are deliberately excluding those with the greatest needs from attaining simple, fair, and much needed equality.”

The Home Office has told Disability News Service that it will be considering these two further recommendations carefully.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “This government has committed to making our streets safer for everyone and nobody should ever be harmed because of who they are.

“Criminals motivated by racial or religious hate already get tougher sentences. 

“Now we are making sure thugs who carry out vile attacks against someone based on their sexual orientation, transgender identity or disability will also spend longer behind bars.”

*Disability Hate Crime: Perspectives for Change, is published by Routledge

26 June 2025

 

Making all self-driving pilot schemes accessible would be ‘counter-productive’ and slow us down, says minister

A transport minister has told peers that it would be “counter-productive” – and take too long – to draw up rules that would ensure all pilot schemes of self-driving taxis are accessible to disabled people.

Labour’s rail minister Lord [Peter] Hendy was responding to concerns from disabled peer Baroness [Sal] Brinton, who had asked whether the government would make sure disabled people could use the self-driving vehicles when the pilots begin in England next spring.

The former president of the Liberal Democrats told Disability News Service (DNS) earlier this month that she was “very, very concerned” that the government was planning to allow companies to launch self-driving taxis and minibuses even if their vehicles were not accessible to disabled people.

She told fellow peers that the launch of driverless vehicles was a “once in an era moment”, and that contracts with providers should ensure that ramps and audio and visual announcements are “designed in right from the start”.

She said: “The government need to ensure that taxis and bus-like taxis will have accessibility designed into them. 

“Otherwise, it will be like everything else for disabled people: reasonable adjustments after the event that are expensive for the manufacturer and never perfect for the user.”

Lord Hendy told her the government would be subject to equality laws in deciding how granting a permit could “improve understanding of how these services should best be designed for and provided to disabled and older passengers”.

And he said permits could enforce certain conditions, while “accessibility considerations” would be set out in guidance.

But he said: “It would be counterproductive to specify detailed requirements in regulation for innovative new services.”

He said it was likely that the first driverless vehicles would be “the same sort of vehicles” already used for taxis and private hire vehicles.

He added: “In the medium term, clearly there will be new designs, and there are already some that are suitable for wheelchairs and people with disabilities. 

“We have to acknowledge that automated vehicles are part of an exciting future, but they have to be implemented safely, and she is right that they have to be implemented to benefit all parts of the community.”

He said he had “great sympathy” with Baroness Brinton “striving to make sure that disability is treated in the mainstream, but if we are going to do this quickly, we have to recognise that the early adoption under this act is likely to be using the same sorts of vehicles as are used now”. 

He said: “What we are looking for in the medium-term future is new designs, which should have the facilities such as audio-visual equipment and facilities for people in wheelchairs that she would expect.”

Lord Hendy said the government needed to “design in – as far as we can – facilities for disabled people among this”, but the government “have to get going with this, because it is such an exciting future”.

But another disabled peer, the Conservative Lord [Kevin] Shinkwin, pointed out that deputy prime minister Angela Rayner had spoken of the importance of getting disabled people into work, and he questioned how “the retro, ad hoc inclusion of disabled people facilitates the realisation of that worthy goal”.

Baroness Brinton told DNS afterwards that Lord Hendy’s response was “very disappointing” and that she would now seek a private meeting with him to discuss her concerns.

Transport for All (TfA), the disabled-led accessible transport charity, said the government’s plans, which could exclude disabled people from the pilot schemes, were “unacceptable”.

Megan Barnett, TfA’s policy and public affairs officer, said: “Equal access to transport allows us to be part of society. 

“If self-driving vehicles are allowed to develop without disabled people, they will only deepen existing inequalities.

“We need a strong national policy to ensure that the design and rollout of this exciting new technology includes disabled people from the start, so our whole community can benefit from driverless vehicles, now and in the future.”

The Department for Transport announced earlier this month that firms would be able to pilot small-scale “taxi- and bus-like” services without being monitored or controlled by a human for the first time next spring, before a potential wider rollout when the Conservative government’s Automated Vehicles Act is implemented in the second half of 2027.

The government believes self-driving vehicles could help reduce deaths and injuries on the roads, add new public transport options in rural areas, and have the potential to improve mobility, accessibility and independence for those who cannot drive, including many disabled and older people.

26 June 2025

 

Involve disabled people ‘meaningfully’ from the start when developing digital assistive tech, says report

There must be “meaningful participation” of disabled people in the initial stages of developing new digital assistive technology, if its potential for supporting their independence is to be realised, according to a new report.

The Royal Society concluded that tech companies, researchers and governments should do more to remove barriers and engage disabled people in the design of digital assistive tools and services.

Among the recommendations made by the Digital Technology report*, launched this week, is that governments should not consider smartphones as any less a form of assistive technology than hearing aids, manual wheelchairs, or white canes.

But it also warns that many disabled people globally experience lower levels of income compared with non-disabled people, so digital assistive technology needs to be affordable if it is to be useful.

It calls on governments, technology companies and research funders to explore ways to ensure affordability.

As part of the research, the Royal Society – the UK’s national academy of sciences – commissioned the Research Institute for Disabled Consumers to survey a panel of 850 disabled people.

Three-fifths (62 per cent) of them said they used digital assistive technology, with more than half of this group doing so throughout the day.

The survey found that more than half of users of digital assistive technology (53 per cent) said they could not live the way they did without it.

The report defines digital assistive technology as “any technology that processes information to help make people’s lives easier”, such as audio-to-text apps, wayfinding and navigation apps, wearable health devices, smart home devices, sight assistance apps, and screen-reading software.

The report also calls for statistics bodies to collect more data on the daily barriers many disabled people experience with their sight, mobility, and memory, rather than solely focusing on their self-reported disability identity. 

Sir Bernard Silverman, emeritus professor of statistics at the University of Oxford and chair of the report’s steering committee, said: “As a statistician, I would particularly stress that the data we record, and how we categorise it, affects everything and everyone.

“Data on the functional challenges experienced by disabled people would help researchers and providers to ensure that digital products and services, especially in the AI age, are genuinely responsive to their needs.”

The report was developed by a committee of international researchers and technology experts, several of whom are themselves disabled.

Dr Hamied Haroon, a research fellow at the University of Manchester and a member of the Royal Society’s diversity and inclusion committee’s disabled scientists subgroup, said: “We shouldn’t be developing assistive technologies or policies without disabled people being front and centre of the process.

“How do you capture the day-to-day challenges faced by disabled people, or ensure you’re offering solutions that actually work, unless you talk to disabled people?”

Dr Haroon, a member of the report’s steering committee, added: “These assistive technologies are fundamental to the workplace and our daily tasks – but they can be prohibitively expensive or unusable in some settings.

“We need to look at removing these barriers, whether that’s costs, additional training, or infrastructure improvements – like addressing patchy mobile data services that can cut off disabled people in rural and deprived areas.”

*Disability Technology: How data and digital assistive technologies can support independent, fulfilled lives

26 June 2025

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

Nearly 100,000 adults have been denied government-funded social care because of a decade’s worth of spending cuts, a Guardian analysis has revealed. The figures highlight how a range of government cuts have put so much pressure on the English social care service that it is leaving tens of thousands of people without the access to long-term care that they would have received 15 years ago: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jun/25/adults-england-denied-state-social-care-due-to-cuts 

Heathrow “needs improvement” in how it assists disabled passengers, a regulator has found. The Civil Aviation Authority, which conducted the assessment, also gave the same rating to Edinburgh and Glasgow Prestwick airports. It said the three airports have “clearly more to do” in their provision of additional support. Fourteen UK airports were rated as “good” and 11 as “very good”. None were rated “poor”: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/heathrow-civil-aviation-authority-frank-gardner-edinburgh-terminal-b2776464.html 

The mayor of London has said the government must think again about its plans to cut benefits for disabled people. Sir Sadiq Khan said the proposed changes would “destroy” the financial safety net of many disabled and disadvantaged Londoners: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn9y3q7eergo 

Downing Street’s disability cuts will have a “devastating” impact on women’s health and dignity and could breach equality laws, the government has been warned: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/24/labours-benefit-cuts-may-discriminate-against-disabled-women-say-charities 

26 June 2025

 

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com

Jun 192025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Below is an extract of a letter from Steve Witherden MP, which was co-signed and enthusiastically supported by unanimous democratic votes of Swansea and Cardiff & Valleys Disabled People Against Cuts groups, calling for the disability benefit cuts to be abandoned, and for disabled people to be involved in the reform of the welfare system.

Dear Secretary of State,

Impacts of the Pathways to Work Green Paper on Wales

The Pathways to Work Green Paper poses a significant threat to over 275,000 Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and 110,000 Universal Credit (UC) recipients in Wales.

The proposals to tighten PIP eligibility and cut the UC health element will push thousands deeper into poverty. Wales will be hit particularly hard.

Policy in Practise’s latest report, The impact of disability benefit reforms in Wales, sees household incomes of an individual in Wales receiving both PIP and the UC Limited Capability for Work and Work-Related Activity element cut by 68% as a result of these reforms.

The knock-on effects will place additional strain on the public sector, including local authorities, health boards, and charitable organisations. The Welsh economy is consequently set to lose an estimated £470 million annually.

We therefore urge you to:

1. Abandon current plans to withdraw disability-related benefits.

2. Meaningfully involve disabled people in the design and delivery of any future reforms.

3. Provide transparency on how these changes will affect Wales and interact with devolved responsibilities.

4. Reform the system to support, not hinder, disabled people and those with long-term health conditions.

The UK Government must safeguard the welfare state for those who need it most.

Without meaningful reform, these proposals will deepen hardship and entrench inequality in Wales.

Yours sincerely,

Steve Witherden MP
Disability Rights UK
Disability Wales
Coalition Against Benefit Cuts
Carers Wales
All Wales People First
Torfaen Access Forum
Disability Arts Cymru
Swansea DPAC
Cardiff & Valleys DPAC
Headway – the brain injury association

The letter on Facebook

The letter on X (Twitter)

 

A letter on house of commons paper.

A letter on house of commons paper.

Jun 182025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

By the UK DDPO Monitoring Coalition June 2025

Introduction

    1. The Equality Impact Assessment for the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) bill was published alongside the impact assessment on 2 May 2025.
    1. For a bill that proposes such fundamental changes to the practice of medicine in England and Wales, this was inexcusably late on in its passage through Parliament.
    1. Due regard for equalities impacts should occur at the beginning of any new initiative and inform the development of that initiative. An EqIA should not be treated as a bolt on extra.
    1. We have significant concerns about the content of this EqIA and agree with commentators who have raised concerns about its adequacy.1
    1. It takes at face value safeguards contained within the bill despite concerns raised by numerous professional bodies, organisations and individual witnesses as to their lack of strength.
    1. It also misses a number of potentially significant adverse equalities impacts and therefore also fails to propose measures to mitigate the risk of those.
    1. A criticism of the passage of the bill shared by doctors and Deaf and Disabled People’s Organisations (DDPOs) is the lack of engagement and account taken of our respective views, informed by expert opinion and lived experience, as well as those of other marginalised groups.2
    1. The EqIA is one example where our input would have been beneficial.

Summary of concerns

    1. Lateness of publication – the EqIA was published on 2 May, more than a month after the end of Committee stage and just two weeks before the first report stage debate.
    1. Coercion – the EqIA gives an inadequate assessment of risks of coercion and the strength of safeguards contained within the bill.
    1. Capacity – the EqIA fails to note question marks regarding the appropriateness of the bill’s use of the Mental Capaity Act (MCA) as a safeguard.
    1. Lack of disability understanding – mental health is inappropriately included as a separate category distinct from disability.
    1. Adverse equalities impacts gaps and omissions – there are a number of potential adverse equalities impacts relevant to the bill that are not included within the EqIA.
    1. These include:
      1. Disability – risk due to inadequate services to live
      1. Disability – risk of medical coercion
      1. Disability – risk from failure to exclude anorexia and voluntary stopping of eating and drinking
      1. LGBTQ+ – risk from fear of accessing palliative care services due to discrimination
      1. Racialised communities – lack of awareness and lower referral levels for end of life services
      1. Socio-economic disadvantage – risk of seeking assisted dying as a response to poverty
      1. Women – risk of coercion owing to inability to continue care-giving roles within the family
      1. Intersectional impacts for Disabled people experiencing socio-economic disadvantage; members of the LGBTQ+ community living with mental distress; women experiencing socio-economic disadvantage who are therefore at higher risk of domestic abuse
      1. Wider societal impacts including risk of an increase in non-assisted suicide rates and increased levels of disability hostility and hate crime

7. The EqIA is unfit for purpose and increases our already significant concerns regarding the adequacy of safeguards in the bill and its potential to cause adverse equalities impacts.

Jun 182025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net
Stop Disability Benefits Cuts Bill – Liverpool Protest

⏰️ Tuesday 1st of July, 4pm [Previously 3rd July]
at the front of Lime Street Station L3 5QB

Join Merseyside DPAC and Merseyside Crips Against Cuts in a protest against the government’s planned cuts to disability benefits that will push more disabled people into poverty. This is part of a National Day of Action

Access info:
– There are steps at the front of the station with level access routes to the right hand side and a lift from pavement level at the front
– There are multiple accessible toilets inside Lime Street Station
– If you need quiet space at any point during the protest, Liverpool Central Library on William Brown Street (L3 8EW) is 500m from the station and will be open throughout
– This is a busy city centre location, please feel free to bring ear defenders, noise cancelling headphones or any other accessibility devices
– Masks encouraged to protect immuno-compromised members of our community
– If you have any further access queries, please contact this page by DM
A poster with a bloody red handprint with the word "stop!". A stamp in red says, in all-caps, UPDATE!
Text reads: national day of action. The Disability Cuts Bill. Liverpool protest. Tuesday 1st July - 4pm Front of Lime Street Station #TakingThePIP #DisabledNotDisposable #WelfareNotWarfare #NotYourScapegoat On the left is the Merseyside DPAC logo, with Disabled People Against Cuts DPAC.UK.NET written underneath. The logo is a pink, blue, red, green wheel being held by four hands of different skin tones. In the center is an upside-down black triangle bearing the letters D P A C. On the right is the Liverpool and Merseyside Crips against Cuts logo. It is a wheelchair with a giant red fist rising through it, holding a walking-stick. Crips against cuts is written in red.
Jun 122025
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Save the date. Protest the disability cuts.

The government is expected to introduce the disability cuts bill on the 18th of June, and vote on it as soon as July 1st.

They are not even waiting for the sham “consultation” to end on 30th of June.

Disabled People Against Cuts and allies are organising a mass Protest of Parliament on June 30th and a national day of action on July 1st when the second reading of the bill will occur.

More details to follow but it is essential that as many people as possible attend these events.

Some funding is available for travel and other essential costs. Email mail@dpac.uk.net

If you are able to arrange a local protest on July 1st please send us details of your event.

A drawing of the politician Rachel Reeves in a robber's outfit and a sack that says Disability Benefits

Welfare Not Warfare

End Labour’s War on Disabled People

Tax the Rich, Not Crips.

The Government are lying about cuts.

  • Total planned disability benefit cuts are at least £9 billion and not the £4.8 billion being reported.

  • Number of households to be plunged into poverty by the PIP cuts alone is at least 350,000 – 4000,000 including 50,000 children.

  • 1.5 million Deaf and Disabled people will be badly impacted by the changes to PIP, not just the 800,000 being reported.

  • MPs will be forced to vote on the cuts without having all the information and based on the misleading figures that have been reported.

 

Image of a person at the top of a cliff pushing someone out of a wheelchair. The Labour party logo. The Department for Work and Pensions logo.

What can I do as a disabled person?

  • If you’re not already a member – join DPAC!

  • Set up a DPAC group in your area if one doesn’t exist!

  • Participate in DPAC Actions to Scrap the Benefit Cuts

  • Organise locally with other Disabled People to mobilise support for our campaign

  • Contact unions, trades councils, Labour party branches, and build a broad based movement to reverse these austerity cuts.

For more details of local groups and actions, keep checking this page!

 

 

Dec 102024
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Disabled activist takes DWP to court over “disingenuous” consultation on tightening Work Capability Assessment that Deaf and Disabled people could not engage with fairly

In the new “Get Britain Working” White Paper, the Government has promised that before the Work Capability Assessment is reformed or replaced, they will “engage with disabled people” to “build a better system.”

But they have not provided any clarity on what will happen with previous proposed reforms to the Work Capability Assessment, which is the way the DWP decides whether someone should receive two of the main disability benefit payments.

Disabled activist Ellen Clifford will be in the High Court on the 10 and 11 December challenging the DWP over the “rushed and disingenuous” consultation that was held before reforms tightening the Work Capability Assessment were announced in the 2023 Autumn Statement.

Disability rights groups will also be holding a vigil outside the Royal Courts of Justice from 9am on Tuesday 10 December.

Ellen Clifford said: “More than 400,000 people will be worse off by £416 a month if the changes proposed in this consultation go ahead. And then there is the risk that people will lose even more money if they are sanctioned for not being able to comply with conditions will now need to fulfil in order to receive their benefits.

“To be blunt, this would be cataclysmic for Deaf and Disabled people in the UK and would push many into destitution.

“Despite the Government’s commitment to put “the views and voices of disabled people at the heart of all” they do and to “fully consult” on Work Capability Assessment reforms, they have not answered important questions about what will happen to those 400,000 people who stand to be affected if these dangerous proposals are brought in.

“The consultation process was completely unfair. They should not continue with reforms when those impacted were not given any meaningful opportunity to explain why they should not be implemented.”

Clifford, supported by lawyers from Public Law Project, is arguing that the consultation under challenge, which ran between 5 September and 30 October 2023, was unlawful for multiple reasons:

  • It did not explain properly that many people would receive significantly less money (£416 per month) if impacted by the reforms, and may start being required to meet conditions (or, in some cases, meet more stringent conditions) in order to receive their payments, with a risk of sanctions if they did not meet them.
  • The true or primary motive behind the consultation was to reduce spending on disability benefits, rather than being about getting more people into work, which was not disclosed.
  • The consultation paper did not provide any meaningful information about the likely impact of the proposals (including the numbers likely to be impacted and the disability impacts), which prevented consultees from being able to comment meaningfully on proposed reforms.
  • A consultation which ran for just under 8 weeks was insufficient, given the importance of the proposals and the additional time that Deaf and Disabled people and their organisations need to engage meaningfully.

At the interim hearing on October 31, it was revealed

  • The DWP had not done any employment or disability assessments of the proposals they wished to consult on before the consultation was launched.
  • They did, however, undertake reviews to work out what savings may be made from the proposals before consulting. This included estimating how many Deaf and Disabled people may no longer be assessed as having limited capacity for work or work-related activity, if proposals were implemented.

Although the Chancellor of the Exchequer promised to deliver the same savings that the previous Conservative government planned on making, they have not confirmed whether they are intending to implement the reforms that were the subject of the consultation that is under challenge.

The Government has promised to set out its proposed long-term changes to the Work Capability Assessment in a Green Paper in spring 2025 and has expressed an intention to “fully consult on these proposals with disabled people and representative organisations.”

Aoife O’Reilly, the Public Law Project lawyer acting for Clifford, said: “The matters raised by the consultation Ellen Clifford is challenging were extremely serious for Deaf and Disabled people, and they ought to have been consulted fairly and lawfully. We do not think this happened on this occasion.
“We are arguing that the proposed reforms were not adequately explained to Deaf and Disabled people and that the real motivation was to reduce spending on disability benefits, which was not disclosed by the Government.
“The Government said they were consulting on proposals to support more Disabled people into work, but it is apparent from evidence already provided to the Court that it carried out no employment or disability impact before launching the consultation, with focus instead being on the savings that could be announced as part of the Autumn Statement.
“It was unfair not to be transparent with Deaf and Disabled people about what they were trying to achieve, and we say this lack of transparency made the consultation unlawful.”
“The fact the consultation process only ran for just under eight weeks was also plainly inadequate, given the significance of the reforms and the need to ensure that Deaf and Disabled people impacted had the opportunity to engage meaningfully. The Equality and Human Rights Commission made this point at the time, but unfortunately the Government did not listen.”

Ellen Clifford said: “The disingenuous and rushed consultation last year meant that the DWP did not properly listen to the voices of Deaf and Disabled people over a life-and-death issue.

“I am very glad that we will finally be heard in court today. This is a necessary first step in Deaf and Disabled people working towards a system that prioritises our lives, rather than cuts or savings.

“Going forwards, we hope there is real co-production in designing a social security system that is a benefit to society and which prevents rather than causes harm. Deaf and Disabled benefit claimants and our organisations have insights into solutions as well as the problems with the current system – as do frontline DWP workers, trade unions and also family members of benefit death victims who want lessons learned from mistakes of the past. Our expertise is an essential component in good policy-making.”

Martin Cavanagh, National President of PCS union which represents DWP workers, said: “PCS has long campaigned for a radical overhaul of the Social Security system in the UK, with greater flexibility given to our members to support those that use DWP services.

“We give a cautious welcome to the announcement last month of greater resources for Jobcentres and more flexibility for work coaches to deliver a more personalised service. Our members want to help people, not punish them.

“Any changes must be properly consulted on. The government consultation on the WCA changes did not mention that under their proposals, around 450,000 more Deaf and Disabled people will be at risk of sanctions.”

Meg Thomas, spokesperson for the UK Monitoring Coalition, said: “I saw directly how Deaf and Disabled people were misled by the information provided and not given time to respond. The time given was nowhere near enough to consult our members properly on proposed policy changes which could have a catastrophic impact on them.

“We agree that the benefits system needs reform, but this needs to come in co-production with disabled people, not at our expense.”

Tracey Lazard, CEO of Inclusion London, said: “It is hugely disappointing that despite promising to co-produce policies with us, the new government has decided to proceed with defending this case.

“When our country ratified UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled people, it promised to protect our right to an adequate standard of living and to co-produce policies with us.  Continuing to defend this deeply flawed consultation and possibly even implementing this policy will be a breach of the Convention as well as a huge blow to the claimants it will hit.

We urge the government to stop and rethink and view social security as an investment in people’s lives.”

Paula Peters, spokesperson for Disabled People Against Cuts, said: “The inadequacy of the consultation process for Workplace Capability Assessment indicators was insulting to the thousands of Deaf and Disabled people who the changes will harm. In the government’s rush to save a relatively small amount of money, the consultation misrepresented the proposals as a move to support more benefit claimants into employment, without giving us all the information on how we will be affected.”

Andy Mitchell, co-founder of Unite the union’s Cut Sanctions Not Incomes campaign, said: “The fact that Disabled people have been forced to go to court to challenge a misleading consultation on a policy that will have a devastating impact on so many of us is yet more evidence of how our voices, needs and lives are ignored.

“The government should be looking to end rather than increase conditionality and sanctions, which are proven to move individual claimants further from employment while causing avoidable harm.”

Notes:

  • The hearing will take place on 10 and 11 December in the Rolls Building.
  • Disabled benefit claimants potentially impacted by the proposed changes will be at the vigil and are willing to speak to media.
  • Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) figures show only around 3 per cent of those affected by the planned changes – 15,400 people – will move into work by 2028/29 as a result.
  • Clifford is represented by Public Law Project, Jenni Richards KC of 39 Essex Chambers and Tom Royston of Garden Court North Chambers.

 

 

 

 

 

Apr 102020
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

DPAC is aware that some disabled people are not receiving essential support and resources from their local Council that they need during the pandemic.

Disabled people with certain impairments and health conditions are among those most at risk from Covid 19. At the same time, the government and medical professionals have made clear that they will not even be admitted to hospital let alone prioritised for treatment. The situation many disabled people living in the community have been left in has then put them at much greater risk, without access to food deliveries or protective equipment for the personal assistants coming in and out of their homes to provide indispensable support with fundamentally important daily tasks such as eating, drinking, using the toilet and staying clean.

Some local authorities are operating good practices such as contacting everyone in their area with disability related support needs and co-ordinating deliveries of food and other supplies.

Sadly, others are not.

Inclusion London has produced a useful template letter for individuals who have not been provided with the PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) that they need for their personal assistants.
The letter can be downloaded here: https://www.inclusionlondon.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/template-letter-re-LA-failure-to-supply-PPE.doc

Scope has information on their website about how disabled people can access food and other essentials during the pandemic, including how to register as a “vulnerable” person with the government in order to access priority deliveries from supermarkets. Go to: https://www.scope.org.uk/advice-and-support/food-and-essentials-during-coronavirus/

The link to register with the government as “vulnerable” can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus-extremely-vulnerable

Disabled People’s Organisations have raised concerns about the creation of a government register of “vulnerable people” including data protection implications. There are 14 Million disabled people in the UK, qualifying for reasonable adjustments of one sort or another, but this register will only assist an anticipated 10% of disabled people. Read what Chris Fry of Fry Law has to say about the register here: http://www.frylaw.co.uk/archives/articles/dont-share-the-vulnerable-people-register/

Fry Law have developed a template letter to enable disabled customers to challenge supermarkets about lack of access to online delivery services. You can download the letter here: www.dpac.uk.net/2020/04/18010

DPAC understands that provision that is in place on paper (or on websites) too often fails to translate to provision on the ground to the people that need it. We also understand that not everyone will have the energy to both battle for your survival and share your experiences, but where possible within your individual circumstances we would like to hear about any difficulties you have faced or are facing in accessing the resources and support so that we can campaign for improvements – either using the comments below or by emailing mail@dpac.uk.net.

Jun 052019
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

Saturday 3rd August – for more info and to book a place go to: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/crippled-austerity-and-the-demonization-of-disabled-people-launch-for-frances-ryans-new-book-tickets-62955660074

Frances Ryan discusses her searing exposé of austerity’s impact on disabled people, alongside Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty and Paul Atherton, who is referred to in the Housing Chapter and has been homeless for ten years.

In austerity Britain, disabled people have become the favourite target. From social care to the benefits system, politicians and the media alike have made the case that Britain’s 12 million disabled people are a drain on the public purse. In this event, Frances Ryan exposes the disturbing reality, telling the story of those most affected by this devastating regime. She talks about a paralysed man forced to crawl down the stairs because the council wouldn’t provide accessible housing; a malnourished woman sleeping in her wheelchair; and a young girl with bipolar forced to turn to sex work to survive.

Through these personal stories, Ryan charts how in recent years the public attitude towards disabled people has transformed from compassion to contempt: from society’s ‘most vulnerable’ to benefit cheats. Crippled is a damning indictment of a safety net gone wrong, and a passionate demand for an end to austerity measures hitting those most in need.

Disabled People Against Cuts will be hosting an afternoon with Frances Ryan. Introduced by Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty, Ryan will be joined by a guest panel to discuss her book Crippled.
Please note that Frances Ryan is unable to travel at this time so will be appearing via a live link. There will be copies of the book available to buy and breastplates ready signed by Frances.

Access information: the venue is wheelchair accessible. For those unable to attend in person the event will be filmed with thanks to @imajsaclaimant.

Supported by Disabled People Against Cuts, Unite the Union and the People’s Assembly.

 

Dec 202018
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. It has brought in its wake the destruction of many social support systems for all of us but for disabled people it has meant a severe decrease in our ability to engage in life. The demise of the Independent Living Fund, reductions in social care, the unwillingness to consider medical evidence, the restriction on support … the list goes on. 

Whether you accept the concept of equality or not, the fact remains that our world is essentially constructed for bipedal creatures with a given capacity for sight, hearing and mobility. The world is eminently suited for all those who can climb stairs, read basic instructions, have a basic understanding of language and its usage and can perform a given set of functions on command. Fail in any of those and you are considered disabled. 

In relatively primitive societies when babies were born with the clear indication that they would never attain the full physical capacity they were exposed on hill sides and left to the elements. One society we know of was Sparta. Plutarch, aka Lucius Mestrius Plutarchus, gives us the Greek story that ancient Spartans threw their stunted and sickly babies off a cliff. Whether this story is true, or a myth, is at this moment immaterial. The fact is that the belief that this was true has fed into social movement such as the Hitler Youth. In the early 1920s, the Nazi party had established a youth movement to train them to become Stormtroopers.

The idealisation of perfect people with the full capacity of bipedal motion reading basic instructions, having a basic understanding of language and its usage and capable of performing a given set of functions on command was the underpinning of much of the Nazi Party ideology. They of course took it one step further still in that they also held that the Aryan was the only perfect exemplar of these perfect people. But that is by the by. What is relative to this article is that the Nazi ideology led to Aktion T4. Starting as a euthanasia program that eliminated disabled infants and children deemed unfit to live and expanding in time to cover disabled adults and the elderly. 

Aktion T4 was a direct result of a new bureaucracy with a mandate to kill anyone considered to have a “life unworthy of living”. The Nazis themselves referred to the victims of Aktion T4 as “burdensome lives” and “useless eaters”.Criteria for inclusion into the programme was not exclusively medical or genetic. People were assigned to the programme largely on ‘Economic Productivity’. 

Aktion T4 killed 70,000 people during its first two years of operation. Initially by starvation and lethal injection. Later, efficiency led to the development of asphyxiation by poison gas.  The program officially ended in 1941 amid a welter of protests from many quarters of German society. It however did go on more covertly. The total number of victims are estimated to have reached 200,000 plus.  Furthermore, it was the lessons the Nazis learned from Aktion T4 that helped them later on in their ‘final solution’.

We have all heard about the Yellow Star that Jews were required to wear under the Nazi Regime. This was but one of the classification symbols Nazis employed.  Notion that the star is but two triangles, one inverted on the other, was employed to classify people depending on their origin, their sexual orientation, their political affiliations, their religion and their overall productivity towards the Nazi war effort. Disabled people, those considered unfit for ‘economic productivity’ and eventually all others who were deemed ‘anti-social’ by the regime were accorded a Black Triangle. Which, incidently, is why the DPAC logo contains a black triangle at it’s centre.

Coming forward to the present day, prior to the Austerity programme, there were still many matters lacking for the ability of disabled people to fully engage in public life. But things were improving slowly, admittedly, but surely. We were gradually getting the notion of the Social Model of disability accepted. The notion was become accepted that people were disabled not by their impairment but rather by the society they were living in. All that went to the wall with the Austerity programme. We are currently facing the basic notion that impairment is a personal fault that society does not have to make room for, make concessions to or accept responsibility for. Unlike Aktion T4, the Austerity programme has not quite taken an active hand in killing disabled people. But disabled people are still dying as a result of austerity. 

Many disabled people do view the assault on their ability to engage in public life by the myriad of cuts, both in personal support and in social support, as akin to the intent of Aktion T4. I posit that this view is far from irrational. In fact, it is the only logical way to see the impact of the Austerity programme which is essentially a means of minimising Governmental responsibility for those it governs. 

Governments are there to set the stage on which we live our daily lives. If it makes it more difficult, or rather impossible for some of us the traverse that stage then government policy is wholly responsible for our inability to live full lives.

Austerity is responsible for killing each and every person who has found it impossible to live up to the expectations of economic activity as set by the governments that have initiated, and followed, the precepts of Austerity. Further, call a rose by any other name, and it still has thorns. Saying that Austerity is over has not meant that the impact of Austerity is no longer there. As long as disabled people are forced, through the actions and lack of action, by this or any other government, to live restricted lives, through lack of social support, we will, quite rightly, continue to see their actions, or lack thereof, in the same light as Aktion T4.

Miriam Binder

 Posted by at 21:09
Dec 202018
 
DPAC Logo with text underneath "Disabled People Against Cuts" and then web address dpac.uk.net

I am a longstanding DPAC supporter and now also Disability Officer for my local Labour Party (Berwick upon Tweed).  I would like to make contact with any other DPAC supporters in Northumberland to discuss campaigning against the Tories ‘hostile environment ‘ & how we can promote justice for all disabled people. Please contact me, Sarah, on sreqwerty@gmail.com

 

 Posted by at 21:00