Share this post:

The government has put out a verbal smokescreen to cover its vandalism of eligibility criteria for disability benefits.

Rejecting calls for its controversial Pathways to Work Green Paper to be abandoned, ministers issued a lengthy justification of what they are doing — one that failed to offer any assurance that lived experience or expert feedback will influence policy decisions.

The official response came after more than 10,000 people signed a petition demanding the Green Paper be scrapped and replaced with a meaningful National Disability Strategy.

That number triggered the government’s obligation to respond — but the reply itself shows the futility of such petitions in the face of a government set on dismantling protections for disabled people.

Despite repeated claims of “co-production” and “collaboration,” ministers are pressing ahead with legislation based on the Green Paper’s proposals.

The Universal Credit Bill (formerly the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill) which pushes through damaging “reforms”, has already been debated and passed by the House of Commons.

This makes any consultation feel hollow — the decisions have been made, regardless of what disabled people say.

The government boasts that more than 45,000 responses were received during the consultation (is that all? Millions of people will be affected) and that new “Collaboration Committees” will allow disabled people and experts to shape reforms.

But nowhere in the response is there any commitment to actually act on what these groups advise.

In effect, ministers are asking disabled people to rubber-stamp a process they’ve already set in motion.

Even the supposed concessions — such as delaying changes to PIP eligibility and promising a review — are vague and non-binding.

The PIP assessment review, we’re told (for the umpteenth time, as if it means something), will be “co-produced with disabled people,” but there is no suggestion that the outcome will be guided by anything more than political expedience.

“Co-production” without a commitment to implement what disabled people say is not inclusion — it’s window-dressing.

The same applies to the reassurances about Universal Credit.

While the government claims it will protect incomes and shield people with severe conditions from reassessment, from April 2026 this will only apply to narrow groups.

Everyone else — including those with fluctuating conditions or mental health issues — is left facing uncertainty and the continued threat of punitive assessment regimes.

The truth is that ministers are determined to reframe disability benefits as employment incentives.

The goal is not to support people but to cut costs and force more disabled people into the labour market, regardless of the consequences.

Worse still, the government’s language — “equal choices,” “boosting employment,” “reform” — dresses up coercion as empowerment.

This has been the tactic for years: present cuts as fairness, and frame resistance from disabled people as a lack of ambition or independence.

Nothing in the government’s response guarantees that disabled people’s voices will shape the future of welfare policy.

Nothing in this response commits to a reversal or even a pause in damaging reforms.

The use of inclusive language is a fig leaf for policies that strip away safety nets.

If this is what “collaboration” looks like under this government, then disabled people have every reason to fear what comes next.

Share this post: