A YEAR in power and the current Labour government reels from one crisis to the next. The recent cabinet reshuffle has seen the sacking of Liz Kendall as DWP head to be replaced by the even more robotic Pat McFadden. 

McFadden is a hard-right Starmerite henchman appointed to try and succeed in making major cuts to PIP where Kendall failed. He has made it clear on numerous occasions that he is committed to supporting major cuts to disability benefits, so we can expect no change from this reactionary.

McFadden will now oversee the major cuts to universal credit (UC) passed by the government back in July. The government has recently received a withering attack on its plan to proceed with its cuts to UC, which will plunge over 730,000 people deeper into poverty by 2030, from the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB). 

The government-funded CAB, which helps hundreds of thousands of people each year with benefit issues, has called on the Starmer government to delay its savage cuts to UC.

The CAB report, “Not so Universal: the two-tiered health element. How the UC Bill will create a two-tiered system for disabled people,” makes it clear that cutting £3,000 a year from new claimants of UC from March 2026 will create a two-tier benefits system. 

This will be based on open discrimination against disabled people who are unfortunate enough to make a claim after that date. As the CAB points out, “It won’t help disabled people into work. And people with severe, life-long conditions may miss out on protections.’’

This CAB report articulates the deep-seated fears and anger that many in the disabled community have felt over Labour’s savage cuts to benefits. It is a validation of our lived experience and a stark warning about the immense harm which these unnecessary cuts will cause to large numbers of vulnerable people.

The CAB report expresses the profound sense of betrayal felt by large numbers of disabled people whose human rights are once again being violated by a Labour government. 

The creation of a“two-tiered system” means that your worth and support are determined not by your needs, but by the date on a form. Someone after March 2026 may have the exact same needs and costs as someone who claimed before then, but they will get a much lower level of support.

This report from the CAB destroys the Labour government’s narrative that we are “taking the Mickey” by “choosing” not to work. The government’s rationale that UC health creates a“perverse incentive” to avoid work is deeply insulting and pours gasoline on the bonfire of hatred being directed against disabled claimants by the Tory media. The CAB report counters this reactionary viewpoint when it states:

“The UC health element isn’t a barrier to work. It actually makes trying work more affordable, as people receiving UC health have a ‘work allowance.’ There’s no guarantee that any of these people will be able to find work. And it’s not that they don’t want to. It’s more like it’s not accessible to them.”

The CAB report states unequivocally that the cuts to UC will cause immense harm to hundreds of thousands of disabled people. Earlier this year, the CAB found that over four in 10 disabled people were struggling to afford their essentials of life, with half having to use savings to cover the cost of these. A quarter of disabled people were avoiding medical costs, and almost a third were skipping meals to pay their bills.

The report doesn’t pull any punches and lambasts the government for the devastating impact of these cuts to UC:

“The cuts will leave many disabled people unable to afford their essentials. The people we help with debt who are disabled, out of work and claiming UC already have an average monthly deficit of £26 in their budget after paying for essentials. 

“Cutting UC health by over £200 will push many of the people we help into deeper hardship. Almost one in three of the people who came to us for help with UC health in 2024/2025 also needed help with crisis support. More than one quarter needed advice on debt. We expect these numbers to increase as a result of the cuts.”

The CAB report uses detailed case studies of real individuals to illustrate the very real and human impact of the proposed policy changes.

Anita is a single woman in her 50s with severe mental health problems and learning difficulties. She has regular panic attacks, struggles to walk due to foot issues, and needs help with basic tasks like preparing food, getting dressed, and managing her toilet needs. She relies on family for daily reminders to eat and take medication.

She currently receives PIP and UC, including the UC health element (LCWRA or Limited Capability for Work and Work Related Activity). After paying all her essential costs, she has a small but positive monthly surplus of £152.

Although Anita is a current claimant and would be “protected” from the direct cut, the report uses her budget to model the impact on a new claimant with identical needs. If the reduced UC health rate were applied to her finances, her monthly surplus would turn into a deficit of £16. This would make Anita unable to afford her basic essentials, pushing her into debt and putting her at severe risk of “eviction, debt enforcement and severe hardship.”

Anita’s story shows that the current level of support is a lifeline that allows her to just barely survive. The proposed cut would break that lifeline for anyone in her situation who needs to claim after April 2026.

The CAB report takes head on the promised protections of people who meet the arbitrary criteria of the severe conditions group. The promise to protect those people with the“most severe conditions” feels like a cruel mirage when you study the criteria for the SC group. People with fluctuating conditions are unlikely to meet the criteria. The report explains the problem with the SC criteria and the discrimination many will face trying to get into this group:

“The new wording specifies that disabled people must meet at least one descriptor ‘constantly,’ rather than the majority of the time... This would make it more difficult for people with fluctuating conditions to meet the criteria. The Bill also states that they’ll need to have an NHS diagnosis. That means that people who struggle to get one, for example, due to long waiting lists, may also be excluded.”

The CAB report also identifies how the criteria for the severe conditions group will discriminate against people with illnesses which get worse over time and young disabled people:

“Those who have progressive illnesses which get worse over time will also lose out... This could affect people with conditions like arthritis, Parkinson’s disease and multiple sclerosis.

“Protections for current claimants also don’t extend to young disabled people who become adults... This will affect all young people who become qualifying adults from the cut-off date onwards.”

This CAB report is a crucial ally in our fight against the cuts to UC. Its call to delay the cuts is a demand for the government to stop and listen before it causes major harm to large numbers of disabled people:

“We want to see the cuts to UC health delayed until a real assessment of the policy and its potential impacts has taken place. It’s imperative that they properly consult with disabled people and their advocates. Real, impactful reforms cannot be worked backwards from savings targets.”

The recent TUC conference passed two motions opposing the Labour government’s attacks on disability benefits. They both noted that over half of the 16 million people living in poverty have a disability, of whom hundreds of thousands are trade unionists. 

The trade unions, in collaboration with disabled people’s organisations, must get actively involved in resisting this ongoing attack on some of the most vulnerable sections of the working class. They need to work towards implementing these TUC motions calling for mass resistance to Labour austerity.

Dylan Murphy is a member of DPAC and Unite Community.