Sunderland councillor and carer calls welfare plan scary
A Conservative councillor who has cared for his disabled mother since he was a child said he is "scared" by the government's planned changes to benefits even though he supports reducing the welfare bill.Among the changes announced by the Labour government was a tightening of the eligibility criteria for personal independence payment and a "right to try" work without immediately losing benefits.Sunderland Tory group leader Antony Mullen said there were elements his party could support, but accused Labour of not telling the public of its plans ahead of the last election.Defending the changes, Labour MP for Penrith & Solway Markus Campbell-Savours told BBC Politics North: "Ultimately this is about us ensuring the system is fairer."Appearing on the same programme, Lib Dem councillor Jemma Joy said more support should be given to employers to help them recruit and retain disabled staff.
Mullen told the BBC: "There are certainly some elements that I think the Conservatives could support, but I felt very scared this week, because I've been a carer for my disabled mother since I was 11 years old."So I've felt this very personally, because there will never come a time when she is able to work."
Mullen said: "There are some people who probably haven't got the right support, the jobs probably don't exist for them in the local area."They probably haven't had the right kind of guidance from people, they might need support getting new qualifications."He said the plan "wasn't in Labour's manifesto, it wasn't clear what they were going to do with this", but added: "I think if people can work, and want to work, they should absolutely be encouraged to do so."
Campbell-Savours argued the rising cost of benefits required the government to take action. He said: "When you've got a welfare bill which has gone up since Covid from £30bn to £50bn, and is expected to reach £70bn by the end of this decade, that area of expenditure should be looked at "We should be prioritising getting people into work and not being in a situation where they're on sickness benefits in the first place."The MP said he understood concerns about welfare changes from Labour Party colleagues. "I think it's not surprising that Labour party activists and members – many of whom have campaigned for some of the most vulnerable people in the world – will have concerns about some of these measures." he said.
Redcar and Cleveland councillor Joy said: "We would like to see is a fair system where government support is there for employers to make provision for people with disabilities or extra needs to stay in work and create some stability for themselves. "I think we have to be careful with the language that we use. "We're calling them benefits, they're not benefits they're personal independence payments."That means that you might actually be working and you use that payment to help with additional needs, additional support from someone else to care for you or for equipment."We know that a significant proportion have really significant mental health issues, and this is only going to make that worse."
Politics North airs on 10am on Sunday on BBC One in the North East and Cumbria. Catch up on previous episodes now on the iPlayer.Follow BBC North East on X and Facebook and BBC Cumbria on X and Facebook and both on Nextdoor and Instagram. Send your story ideas here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
34 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Senior council leader ‘confident' of more spending review support for the poor
Rachel Reeves announced that nine million pensioners in England and Wales will receive the winter fuel payment this winter, in a £1.25 billion U-turn on the Government's previous position. Speaking exclusively to the PA news agency, Sir Stephen welcomed the move and other recent measures such as the extension of free school meals. Sir Stephen Houghton is leader of Barnsley Council (Dominic Lipinski/PA) But he said a broader package of initiatives aimed at supporting low income working families is now necessary and would represent an 'important political statement'. In a statement released by the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities (Sigoma) in response to the announcement on winter fuel payments, Sir Stephen said: 'I am confident that the Chancellor will continue in this spirit and use the upcoming spending review to provide further financial support to councils who are working hard to deliver for residents in challenging times.' When asked to explain why he is confident at a time when revenue spending will be limited by factors such as slow growth and high borrowing costs, he said: 'Speaking to ministers (in the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government) and speaking to advisers in the department. 'I have spent 14 years lobbying for this unsuccessfully with the previous government. 'I am confident because (local government minister) Jim McMahon is a former council leader, and he gets it. 'We have got to make sure that he doesn't get overruled by the Chancellor and the Prime Minister who are getting pressure from other parts of the country. 'I think he will hold his nerve.' Sir Stephen identified reducing transport and social rent costs as measures which would benefit the community in Barnsley and elsewhere, adding they should be part of a 'comprehensive' support package. 'That will do the Government good, both politically and by helping the people that need it the most,' he added. On capital investment, Sir Stephen warned of a 'real danger' that the Treasury will prioritise infrastructure spending on big cities to secure a 'maximum return'. 'Civil servants are telling ministers that the problem with that is it provides the least political return because these cities are already voting Labour,' he said. Advocating an alternative approach, Sir Stephen added: 'Left behind communities deserve to have economies that function effectively, and you can get growth there as well if you invest. 'These are the places that have been leaving Labour. 'Why can't you have a decent quality of life if you live in Bolton, Bury, Blyth or Grimsby? 'Those communities are the ones that, for 30-odd years, have seen the big cities be the be-all and end-all. 'That leaves you with Brexit. 'It leaves you with, from a Labour perspective, Boris Johnson majorities in red wall seats. It leaves you with riots last year. 'It leaves you with Reform (gains in the local elections) just a month ago.' 'We need a short-term package of measures to say 'we are bothered' – life is hard,' he added.
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
MPs raise concerns about Jersey's 'backdoor route into the UK'
MPs in the UK have raised concerns about Jersey 's French ID card scheme, saying it opens a "backdoor route into the UK" for potential illegal immigrants. The ID card scheme grants French visitors access to the island for the day without the need for a passport. It was introduced in both Bailiwicks in 2023, after it was found the number of day trippers had fallen post-Brexit - and last week, Jersey's government voted unanimously to extend the scheme on the basis of its success. However, UK MPs are now flagging it as a risk to their own border security. Chris Philp, the UK's Shadow Home Secretary and Conservative MP for Croydon South, says "our concern is that French ID cards are not particularly secure documents - it is possible to forge them relatively easily. "And because the Channel Islands are part of the Common Travel Area, the checks between the Channel Islands and the UK mainland are nothing like as strict as a regular passport control." Whilst no person has been identified to have exploited the scheme in this way in the past two years, Philp argues "concerns about border control are higher now than they ever have been." Citing rising number of immigrants who've made their way to the UK on small boats from Calais, he argues Jersey's scheme leaves a chink in the UK's armour that has the power to "snowball into something much larger" if left unaddressed. "When you have a vulnerability with your border security, what can start off as a very small problem can rapidly grow as illegal immigrants and others exploit vulnerabilities", he says. Philp hasn't raised concerns with members of Jersey's government directly. However, the island's Home Affairs Minister, Deputy Mary le Hegarat, admitted in the Assembly last week that "it is quite clear with correspondence from the Home Office that this is not a project they endorse." She added: "This heightens the risk for us in relation to the Common Travel Area and also potentially us being given a hard border." But Deputy Ian Gorst, Jersey's Minister for External Relations, says suitable checks and balances are in place to ensure the system isn't exploited as a pathway to the mainland. "These arrivals on their ID card have to have a return ticket for the ferry and there have been no incidences of onward travel to other places within the Common Travel Area. "So we can be confident that our border forces are protecting us and yet at the same time bringing this benefit to Jersey's economy." Guernsey is in the process of deciding whether to extend their version of the scheme for another year. A Guernsey Government spokesperson says: "It is the intention in Guernsey to extend the French Identity Card Scheme locally, on the condition it does not place our membership of the Common Travel Area at risk. "Guernsey Border Agency Officers have been in contact with the UK to discuss the matter from a Bailiwick of Guernsey perspective, and will continue to work with UK counterparts around the introduction of ETAs." Want the inside track on the issues that will shape Guernsey's Election this June? Listen to Guernsey Votes, an ITV Channel podcast packed with expert guests, local insight and analysis you can trust...
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Winter fuel payment U-turn in numbers
The government's decision to largely reverse its cuts to winter fuel payments has raised questions about its spending and savings plans - and its fiscal Verify has been looking at the the key numbers. What has changed on winter fuel? At the time Labour won the 2024 general election, the Department for Work and Pensions was projecting that 10.8 million pensioners in England and Wales would be eligible for winter fuel payments in payments are worth either £200 or £300 per household. The new government, in order to save money, decided that only pensioners in receipt of pension credit (a separate benefit aimed at low-income pensioners) would receive winter fuel payments that winter - and said that would reduce the number of individual recipients to 1.5 the government has changed course - after widespread criticism - and said that, from 2025-26, all pensioners will get it, although it will be clawed back in the following tax year from individuals earning £35,000 and claims this means about 9 million pensioners will now be eligible.. The effect of this is largely to undo the impact of its initial policy in terms of the numbers affected. How much will this cost? The government estimated that the cost of the winter fuel payment system it inherited in 2024-25 would have been £ estimated that its initial reform last year would cut this bill by £1.4bn in 2024-25 (rising to £1.5bn in 2025-26) taking the cost of the system down to £0.5bnNow the government says the cost of the system after its latest change will be £1.25bn - a saving of £450m relative to a system in which all pensioners were eligible to receive the government added that this £450m saving has not yet been certified by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) - the government's official if it transpired, this saving would be only a third of the original £1.5bn savings target. And some analysts think the overall net saving for the government could actually be lower Labour's initial 2024 reform, winter fuel payments were only available to those in receipt of a separate benefit aimed at low-income pensioners, called pension year, the government initiated a campaign to encourage the hundreds of thousands of pensioners who are eligible for pension credit, but who do not claim it, to start doing latest data shows almost 60,000 more pension credit claims were awarded than otherwise might have been, likely because of the government's awareness campaign. With each annual pension credit claim costing the government £3,900 a year on average, the former Lib Dem pensions minister Steve Webb has calculated that the total annual cost of these new claims could be about £ additional cost would offset around half of the £450m savings claimed by the government for its latest changes to winter fuel eligibility. How can the government afford this U-turn? When Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced the tightening of winter fuel payments in 2024, she said the £1.5bn per year savings were needed to stabilise the public those savings were entered into the OBR's budget calculations. Now the savings will only be £450m per year - or even lower - a gap of at least £1bn will open up in the government's Treasury said it will address this gap in the next Budget in the Autumn of 2025 and said "it will not lead to permanent additional borrowing".Assuming the OBR does not raise its GDP growth and tax revenue forecasts in the Budget, giving the government more money to fill the gap, this will imply ministers would either have to raise additional taxes or cut spending elsewhere to close this roughly £1bn gap .However, it should be noted that £1bn is a relatively low sum in the context of the public 2025-26 the government is projected by the OBR to spend £1,347bn and to borrow £ is also worth noting that the projected savings from the government's working age welfare reforms, announced earlier this year, are considerably higher than the savings from changing eligibility for winter fuel changes in eligibility for personal independence payments and the cuts to universal credit incapacity payments are projected by the OBR to save the government £4.8bn a year by 2029-30. If the government were to reverse or water down those reforms, as some Labour MPs are urging, it would create a considerably larger financial headache for the chancellor in terms of meeting her fiscal rules specify that she has to be projected to be on course to balance the government's day-to-day spending budget (which excludes spending on infrastructure) by March 2025, the OBR projected that she had just £9.9bn of "headroom" against this rule, a very small amount of leeway given the size of overall government spending and the welfare cuts would wipe out around half of many economists expect the chancellor's projected headroom to be further eroded by the OBR in any case in the Autumn Budget as a result of downgraded growth forecasts and an increase in government market borrowing costs in recent months. What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?
