logo
Labour MPs demand ‘reset' in relations with Number 10 after welfare U-turn

Labour MPs demand ‘reset' in relations with Number 10 after welfare U-turn

Leader Live10 hours ago

A late-night climbdown on welfare cuts from Number 10 may have seen off the threat of Sir Keir Starmer's first major Commons defeat, with rebels suggesting they now expect the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill to pass its first hurdle on July 1.
But speaking to the PA news agency, a number of Labour backbenchers expressed deeper frustration with how Downing Street has handled its backbenchers since last year's election.
One warned that discontent and low morale among MPs would 'continue to fester' without a 'wider reset' in relations between Number 10 and the Parliamentary Labour Party after 'a year of poor party management'.
Another accused decision-makers in Government of operating as an 'exclusive club' and showing 'disregard' for both backbenchers and experts outside Westminster.
They told PA: 'I think the Government have got to stop pretending they know everything and start listening, because they might learn something.'
Several backbenchers pointed to the Prime Minister's words at a press conference on Wednesday, in which he referred to keeping a 'focus on the change that we want to bring about' rather than the 'noises off'.
Although Government sources suggested Sir Keir was talking in more general terms, rebels have taken his 'noises off' comment as referring to them.
One said: 'A lot of colleagues are sickened at language being used, from the PM's 'noises off' to the senior source saying they thought Keir and Morgan (McSweeney, the Prime Minister's chief of staff) had cleansed the party of self-indulgent rubbish.'
But their frustration is not shared by all Labour backbenchers, with others suggesting Friday's U-turn on welfare cuts shows Downing Street is willing to listen.
One told PA: 'They're a new team, they're a year in and occasionally teams do need to have a moment where things come to a head and they learn.'
Arguing that some backbenchers needed to 'chill out and have a cup of tea', they added they thought the Prime Minister had 'clocked that it's important that we work as part of a team.
'All of us want him to succeed and all of us want the Government to succeed,' they said.
A Number 10 spokesman insisted on Friday that the Prime Minister 'remains fully committed to engaging with parliamentarians'.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Critics warn Sir Keir's screeching welfare U-turn will now result in a 'two-tier' benefits system and a £3billion tax bombshell to pay for it
Critics warn Sir Keir's screeching welfare U-turn will now result in a 'two-tier' benefits system and a £3billion tax bombshell to pay for it

Daily Mail​

time33 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Critics warn Sir Keir's screeching welfare U-turn will now result in a 'two-tier' benefits system and a £3billion tax bombshell to pay for it

Sir Keir Starmer 's benefits climbdown will create a 'two-tier' benefits system with families facing a £3billion tax bombshell to pay for it, critics warned last night. And that will be on top of the £1.25billion bill caused by the Prime Minister's screeching U-turn over winter fuel payments for pensioners. Experts warned the £4.25billion black hole in the public finances caused by the backsliding will probably force Chancellor Rachel Reeves to plug it with more tax rises in her autumn Budget. The Prime Minister was humiliatingly forced to hand Labour 's welfare rebels the concessions in a bid to avoid defeat in a crunch vote on benefits cuts on Tuesday. The compromise deal last night looked like it had peeled off enough of the 126 rebels to pass the vote. However, as many as 50 were still threatening to rebel unless the vote was pulled. The reforms had originally been forecast to save the Government £5billion a year by the end of the Parliament. Charity bosses and Labour MPs still planning to rebel also warned the new proposals would create a 'two-tier' benefits system because existing Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants will keep their current level of disability payments. But new claimants after November 2026, when the changes are scheduled to kick in, would be entitled to as much as £4,000 a year less on average, even if they suffered from the same condition which meant they couldn't work. Before the U-turn, both existing and future claimants were facing stricter eligibility conditions for the daily living component of PIP, a working-age benefit for those whose health condition increases their living costs. The concessions on PIP alone protect some 370,000 people currently receiving the allowance who were set to lose out following reassessment. Meanwhile, existing claimants of the universal credit (UC) health element, paid to those with a condition which stops them working, will have their payments protected in real terms. However, new claimants will see it halved and frozen. According to calculations by the Resolution Foundation think tank, the PIP and UC reforms will cost £1.5billion each. Sir Keir yesterday branded his own climbdown 'common sense' and refused to rule out tax increases to pay for it in an interview. During a visit to RAF Valley in Wales, he said how the Government intended to pay for it would be revealed in the autumn Budget, adding: 'The changes still mean we can deliver the reforms that we need and that's very important because the system needs to be a system that is fit for the future. 'All colleagues are signed up to that, but having listened, we've made the adjustments. The funding will be set out in the Budget in the usual way.' Yesterday's climbdown is hugely embarrassing for Sir Keir as it highlights the scale to which he failed to read his MPs' mood over the proposed cuts, with rebels having spoken out for months. Care minister Stephen Kinnock dismissed criticism that the Government was in chaos and that Sir Keir was not 'competent', insisting that the process had been 'positive and constructive' and that the PM was someone who 'gets stuck into fixing problems'. Care minister Stephen Kinnock (pictured) dismissed criticism that the Government was in chaos and that Sir Keir was not 'competent', insisting that the process had been 'positive and constructive' and that the PM was someone who 'gets stuck into fixing problems' But Kemi Badenoch said the debacle left benefits claimants facing 'the worst of all worlds'. Speaking to reporters on a visit to North West Essex, the Tory leader said: 'I think we're seeing a government that is floundering, a government that is no longer in control despite having a huge majority. I don't see how they're going to be able to deliver any of the things they promised if they can't do something as basic as reducing an increase in spending. 'It's a real shame because what they're doing now with this U-turn is creating a two-tier system... this is the worst of all worlds.' Arch rebel Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, said: 'These revised proposals are nowhere near good enough, and frankly, are just not well thought through. It would create a two-tier system in both PIP and the Universal Credit health element based on when somebody became disabled.' Sir Mel Stride, the Shadow Chancellor, said: 'Labour promised not to raise taxes on working people, and their Jobs Tax has led to rising unemployment and growth being halved. Now the Government has been unable to rule out that taxes will go up this autumn in order to pay for Keir Starmer's latest U-turns.'

Benefits U-turn raises questions about Labour's long-term plan
Benefits U-turn raises questions about Labour's long-term plan

BBC News

time40 minutes ago

  • BBC News

Benefits U-turn raises questions about Labour's long-term plan

About a quarter of the working age population - those aged 16 to 64 - do not currently have a job. Caring responsibilities and ill health are the most common reasons given by those who would like a four-year mandate and a towering majority, Labour might have been expected to have invested in a long-term plan to help those who are sick get back into the workforce, at least part-time. It may have cost up front, but in the future it could have delivered big its determination to avoid a repeat of the Liz Truss mini-budget led them to target big savings quickly - but it ended up causing perhaps even more trouble, with the government performing a spectacular U-turn to avoid a mass Labour raises significant questions, not just about how this year-old government manages its affairs day to day, but if its overall strategy to renew the country is on track. Long-term reform vs short-term savings The government was adamant that its "welfare reform" changes - announced in March's Green Paper - were designed to get people back to bulk of planned savings came from tightening the eligibility for Personal Independence Payments (Pip), which are paid to support people who face extra costs due to disability, regardless of whether or not they are in work. Independent experts questioned whether more of the savings should have been redeployed to help people with ill health ease back in to the workforce, for example part time. That could mean support such as potential employer subsidies - especially to help get younger people into work and pay taxes, rather than claim benefits long term. It could also help fill jobs - a win win for rebels argued that the upfront cuts were aimed at filling a Budget hole against the Chancellor's self imposed borrowing rules. Their central criticism was that this was an emergency cost-cutting is true that the Chancellor's Budget numbers were blown off course by higher borrowing costs, such as those emanating from US President Donald Trump's shock tariffs, so she bridged the borrowing gap with these cuts. The welfare reform plan to save £5bn a year by 2029-30 helped Chancellor Rachel Reeves meet her "non negotiable" borrowing rules. Indeed when the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which monitors the spending plans, said they would not in fact raise enough money, Reeves announced more welfare cuts on the day of the Spring main point was to raise money to help close the gap in the Budget tell me that the welfare reform plan was in fact brought forward for this purpose. But this was still not a full programme of welfare reform designed to deal with a structural issue of rising health-related claims. 'Top slicing never works' The former Conservative Welfare Secretary Iain Duncan Smith resigned as work and pensions secretary almost ten years ago, saying a similar plan to cut disability benefits was "indefensible".He says the cuts should have formed part of "a wider process" of finding the best way to focus resources on those most in need."Top slicing never works," he says of plans to extract savings from the welfare budget without its heart the problem is perceived to be that the current welfare structure has become overly binary, failing to accommodate a growing demographic who should be able to do at least a bit of work. This rigidity - what ministers refer to as a "hard boundary" - inadvertently pushes individuals towards declaring complete unfitness for work, and can lead to total dependence on welfare, particularly universal credit health (UC Health), rather than facilitating a gradual transition back into some leading experts this is, in fact, the biggest cause of the increase in health-related welfare claims. The pandemic may have accelerated the trend, but it started a decade proportion of working age people claiming incapacity benefit had fallen well below 5% in 2015, now it's 7%.The pandemic period exacerbated the rise as ill health rose and many claims were agreed without face-to-face meetings. These claims were also increasingly related to mental ill health. One former minister, who did not wanted to be named, said the system had effectively broken down."The real trouble is people are learning to game the Pip questionnaire with help from internet sites," he says. "It's pretty straightforward to answer the questions in a way that gets the points."As he puts it, the UK is "at the extreme of paying people for being disabled" with people getting money rather than equipment such as wheelchairs as occurs in other most kinds of mental ill health, in kind support, such as therapies, would make more sense than cash transfers, he some disability campaigners have said that being offered vouchers instead of cash payments and thereby removing people's automony over spending, is "an insult" and "dangerous". These pressures can be seen in the nature of the compromise planned cuts to Pip payments will now only apply to new claimants from November next year, sparing 370,000 current claimants out of the 800,000 expected to be affected by the Meg Hillier, Labour MP and chair of the Commons Treasury committee, along with other rebels, have also pointed out that the application of the new four-point threshold for Pip payments will be designed together with disability is a fair assumption that this so called "co-production" may enable more future claimants to retain this universal credit, the government had planned to freeze the higher rate for existing health-related claimants but the payments will now rise in line with inflation. And for future claimants of universal credit, the most severe cases will be spared from a planned halving of the payments, worth an average of £3,000 per these calculations don't take into account the effects of £1bn the government has pulled forward to spend to help those with disabilities and long-term health conditions find work as swiftly as possible. This originally wasn't due to come in until 2029. This change does help Labour's argument that the changes are about reform rather than cost cutting. But this is still not fully fledged radical reform on the scale that is needed to tackle a social, fiscal and economic crisis. The OBR has not yet done the Keep Britain Working review, led by former John Lewis boss Sir Charlie Mayfield, which was commissioned by the government to look into the role of employers in health and disability, has not yet been the Netherlands, where a similar challenge was tackled two decades ago, their system makes employers responsible for the costs of helping people back into work for the first two businesses are concerned about the costs of tax, wages and employment rights policies. And there is already a fundamental question about whether the jobs are out there to support sick workers back into the workforce. Tax rises or other spending cuts The Institute for Fiscal Studies and Resolution Foundation think tanks have estimated the government's U-turn could cost £3bn, meaning Chancellor Rachel Reeves will either have to increase taxes in the autumn budget or cut spending elsewhere if she is to meet her self-imposed spending the income tax threshold freeze again, seems a plausible plan There are still a few months to go, so the Treasury might hope that growth is sustained and that borrowing costs settle, helping with the OBR numbers. It will not be lost on anyone that the precise cause of all this, however, was a hasty effort to try to bridge this same Budget rule maths gap that emerged in questions arise about just how stability and credibility-enhancing it really is to tweak fiscal plans every six months to hit Budget targets that change due to market conditions, with changes that cannot be ultimately idea floated by the International Monetary Fund that these Budget adjustments are only really needed once a year must seem quite attractive today. Is Britain getting sicker? And then there are bigger questions left Britain really fundamentally sicker than it was a decade ago, and if it is, does society want to continue current levels of support? If the best medicine really is work, as some suggest, then can employers cope, and will there be enough jobs?Or was it the system itself - previous welfare cuts - that caused the ramp up in claims in recent years, requiring a more thought-through type of reform? Should support for disability designed to help with the specific costs of physical challenges be required at similar levels by those with depression or anxiety?Dare this government make further changes to welfare? And, in pursuing narrow Budget credibility, has it lost more political credibility without actually being able to pass its plans into law?The government is not just boxed in. It seems to have created one of those magician's tricks where they handcuff themselves behind their backs in a locked box - only they lack the escape skills of a Houdini or will be relief that the markets are calm for now, with sterling and stock markets at multi-year highs. But an effort to close a Budget gap, has ended up with perhaps even more fundamental questions about how and if the government can get things done. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.

Music superstar backs Nigel Farage saying voters ‘should give him a chance'
Music superstar backs Nigel Farage saying voters ‘should give him a chance'

The Sun

timean hour ago

  • The Sun

Music superstar backs Nigel Farage saying voters ‘should give him a chance'

SIR Rod Stewart says voters should 'give Nigel Farage a chance'. The 80-year-old rocker slammed Prime Minister Keir Starmer's policies on fishing rights in Scotland as he revealed he thinks the Reform leader is "coming across well". 2 2 New polls suggest Reform is on track to win the next election - with more than a third of voters saying they will support the right-wing party. And Rod 'The Mod' is no different. Ahead of his Glastonbury set this Sunday, the Maggie May singer insisted that despite his 'extreme wealth', he is not out of touch. Sir Rod was asked in an interview with The Times where he sees Britain's political future heading. He responded: "It's hard for me because I'm extremely wealthy, and I deserve to be, so a lot of it doesn't really touch me. But that doesn't mean I'm out of touch. "For instance, I've read about Starmer cutting off the fishing in Scotland and giving it back to the EU. That hasn't made him popular. We're fed up with the Tories. We've got to give Farage a chance. He's coming across well." "What options have we got? I know some of his family, I know his brother, and I quite like him. "But Starmer's all about getting us out of Brexit and I don't know how he's going to do that. Still, the country will survive. It could be worse. We could be in the Gaza Strip." It comes after the music legend hit out at Farage last June after he claimed that the West provoked Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Stewart previously said he was "outraged and dumbfounded" after Farage argued that the EU and NATO had given Putin a "reason" to tell his people "they're coming for us again'. We previously told how Sir Rod lifted the lid on exactly how much he is getting paid to play at Glastonbury this year - as well as how much money he'll lose. He is set to return to Worthy Farm for the first time in decades, having last performed on the Pyramid Stage 23 years ago. He's performing as this year's Legends slot act, joining a long list of iconic acts who've taken on the prestigious role.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store