Government expected to unveil welfare concessions after talks with Labour rebels
Number 10 had been locked in crisis talks with backbenchers after some 126 MPs within the party signed an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks.
On Thursday night, sources said a deal was being thrashed out between leading rebels and the Government as it seeks to head off the prospect of Sir Keir Starmer's first Commons defeat in a crunch vote next week.
The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill has its second reading on Tuesday, the first opportunity for MPs to support or reject it.
If the legislation clears its first hurdle, it will then face a few hours' examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee tasked with looking at the Bill.
The Government's original package restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limited the sickness-related element of universal credit.
Existing claimants were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes.
However, concessions offered by the Government to save the Bill from defeat are understood to include a commitment that those currently receiving Pip will continue to get the allowance.
This would protect some 370,000 existing claimants who were expected to lose out following reassessment.
Ministers had hoped the reforms would get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year, but fresh changes such as these would leave Chancellor Rachel Reeves needing to find more money elsewhere.
Rebels had also been calling for the Government to row back on a freeze in the health element of universal credit, which was expected to lead to a £450 real decline in support for some 2.2 million existing claimants.
The Government had earlier said it was listening to suggestions to improve the legislation amid concerns about the swift timetable of the Bill.
The so-called 'reasoned amendment' led by Treasury select committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier had argued that disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed.
Speaking in the Commons earlier, Sir Keir told MPs he wanted the reforms to demonstrate 'Labour values of fairness' and that discussions about the changes would continue over the coming days.
He said there was 'consensus across the House on the urgent need for reform' of the 'broken' welfare system.
'I know colleagues across the House are eager to start fixing that, and so am I, and that all colleagues want to get this right, and so do I,' he said.
'We want to see reform implemented with Labour values of fairness.
'That conversation will continue in the coming days, so we can begin making change together on Tuesday.'
There was mixed reaction among charities to the prospect of concessions. Learning disability charity Mencap said the news would be a 'huge relief to thousands of people living in fear of what the future holds'.
'It is the right thing to do and sends a clear message – cutting disability benefits is not a fair way to mend the black hole in the public purse,' director of strategy Jackie O'Sullivan said.
But the MS Society urged rebels to hold firm and block the Bill, insisting any Government offer to water down the reforms would amount to 'kicking the can down the road and delaying an inevitable disaster'.
Head of campaigns at the charity, Charlotte Gill, said: 'We urge MPs not to be swayed by these last ditch attempts to force through a harmful Bill with supposed concessions.
'The only way to avoid a catastrophe today and in the future is to stop the cuts altogether by halting the Bill in its tracks.'
The Tories described concessions as 'the latest in a growing list of screeching U-turns' from the Government.
Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: 'Under pressure from his own MPs Starmer has made another completely unfunded spending commitment.
'Labour's welfare chaos will cost hardworking taxpayers.
'We can't afford Labour.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
41 minutes ago
- Times
Times letters: Fixing the amateur way Britain is governed
Write to letters@ Sir, Munira Mirza's assessment of where we are going wrong appears spot on, and her scathing criticism of our politicians also rings true ('Here's how we can fix the way Britain is run', Jun 26). One hopes that the efforts of her Fix Britain group will bear fruit. However, given that, as she says, there is no shortage of sound input from think tanks, the issue would seem to have less to do with lack of sound advice than an unwillingness to act on it by those who govern us. As to her closing statement about people's reluctance to vote for a political party unless it can tell them exactly how it will fix Britain, the electorate appears to be showing no reluctance whatsoever. If opinion polls are to be believed, Reform is surging ahead — with only the merest nod to the 'how' and no nod at all as to the means by which Britain might be BrowneDatchet, Berks Sir, Munira Mirza is unsparing in her critique of career politicians, whom she characterises as ignorant of their subject and the machinery of government, and as rabbits caught in headlights or consummate bluffers, seeking celebrity but lacking competence. Her proposition, however, is another think tank, a sector with which, as she points out, we are richly blessed. But the difficulty with think tanks is that the thinkers in them have no responsibility for the ideas they propose. They too seek celebrity, their job titles often being 'fellow' or some other quasi-academic handle. Perhaps she could instead found a school for politicians to teach them the machinery of government, and she and the other nine members of Fix Britain's advisory board could take their expertise properly into politics by standing for election as BrockFowlmere, Cambs Sir, Many of us would endorse Munira Mirza's observation that 'something is fundamentally broken about Britain and the way we are run', and applaud the ambition of Fix Britain to 'prepare a prospectus for government' by putting 'the right plan' in place. But the right plan will make little difference if our political system itself remains unreformed, for it is within that system that the fundamental weaknesses of government in the UK exist. These include the lack of professional competence; the inability to create, take and implement strategic decisions in a timely manner; the excessively confrontational nature of party politics; the lack of a genuinely democratic mandate; and the pandering of political parties to the whims of today's voters rather than the needs of future generations. Without profound and coherent reform of our political system I fear that any plans made by Fix Britain will fall on stony General APN CurrieWinchester Sir, Munira Mirza says the measure of success for her Fix Britain group will be 'a future in which no party stands for election without publishing a detailed and credible programme for government'. Yet within a short time of coming to power, any government will face issues entirely unforeseen during the programme-planning stage — Covid-19, the war in Ukraine, the energy crisis, Israel-Gaza etc — that will render its detailed and credible programme obsolete. As Mike Tyson said: 'Everyone has a plan until I punch them in the mouth.'Lucian CampLondon NW1 Sir, Emily Fabricius says that 'grateful patients' are surely the biggest reward for doctors (letter, Jun 26). As a consultant diagnostic histopathologist in NHS labs for 39 years, diagnosing 5,000 patients' diseases/pathology each year, I received a total of two letters from grateful patients. Both were consultant colleagues. My motivation was nevertheless for patient welfare, even though their gratitude may not have been explicit. Diagnosticians are the hidden and unrecognised back-room doctors but are nevertheless John McCarthyRet'd consultant pathologist, Newcastle upon Tyne Sir, I couldn't agree more with Phillip Alderman about the importance of continuity of care (letter, Jun 25). Training to be a doctor, of whichever chosen speciality, is an apprenticeship — one in which the value of watching, absorbing, asking questions and being supervised by senior members of the 'team' should not be underestimated. The sense of belonging this brings, together with ownership of the patient and their journey, has been lost in the change to a shift pattern with reduced working hours and therefore the exposure to pearls of wisdom that you cannot glean from a book. The issue of continuous 'handovers' occurs not only in a hospital setting but also in GP practice, where almost exclusive part-time working contributes to loss of information and the inevitable Siobhan CarrollConsultant anaesthetist, Guildford Sir, Phillip Alderman correctly links continuity of medical care with patient safety. Two systematic reviews have found that continuity is associated with lower patient mortality. Given the usual emphasis on patient safety, the policy blindspot on continuity is Sir Denis Pereira GrayFormer chairman, Academy of Medical Royal Colleges; Exeter Sir, As a relative, friend and former nurse I have had the great privilege of sitting with people of many ages who are dying. Just being able to alleviate some of their distress and discomfort; holding their hand, moistening their lips and wiping their forehead. Praying, if it helps them, reading and softly playing their favourite music, remembering that hearing is the last sensation before consciousness is lost. And frequently reminding them how loved they are by everyone. That is my interpretation of assisted dying. Of course, this scenario is not always possible but I believe that, above all, love must be the dominant factor when you are comforting someone who is WickhamDorking, Surrey Sir, Dr MWM Upton speaks of the palliative doses of morphine that are given when a patient is in great distress towards the end of their life (letter, Jun 24). My mother and father, and recently my husband, were allowed to die in this way. The kindness and mercy of such a palliation were profoundly helpful to them, and to me, as I sat with them at the end of their CoshBournemouth Sir, Wes Streeting says there is no 'budget' for setting up an assisted dying service in a constricted NHS (news, Jun 26). He should surely balance against this cost the savings gained in not having to treat those patients who opt for assisted dying during the final six months of a terminal GrayIffley, Oxon Sir, I agree with all of Alice Thomson's excellent article (Jun 25; letters, Jun 26) save for its headline 'Too many women see childbirth as traumatic'. This should have read: 'Childbirth is too traumatic for too many women.' The young women of my daughter's cohort were all traumatised by their birthing experiences, none being straightforward or without significant, unplanned interventions. Several have cited it as their reason for adopting a 'one-child' policy — devastating for an already declining birthrate and an indictment of our maternity services. Wes Streeting should roll his sleeves up and sort this SlaterStowmarket, Suffolk Sir, Edward Lucas is right to highlight the cowardice of Nato ('Nato's Potemkin summit sends lethal signals', Jun 26). At a time when Ukraine needs to feel the support of Nato, the Nato summit was an appeasement of a maverick and unpredictable US president. It should have been a summit in which European nations reassured Ukraine of their commitment. At a time when civilian targets are being increasingly attacked in Ukraine, air support is essential. The attack on Dnipro train station on Tuesday was only a success because local units had run out of air defence missiles. Talk of increased Nato defence spending in the future is of no comfort here. I hope we don't live to regret Nato's EdwardsZhytomyr, Ukraine Sir, I beg to differ with Georgi Holley about Glastonbury festival (letter, Jun 24). I live within a short walk of Worthy Farm and find the disruption minimal. Yes, we have a proliferation of pop-up camping sites but only for two weeks before the festival. Our lanes 'designed for horses and traps' are regularly visited by overlarge lorries, so no change there. Most of the festival is on-site and provides a gloriously memorable week for those who attend. The atmosphere is one to treasure and it is a safe environment for young people to celebrate the end of their exams. My husband and I have volunteered there and regularly benefit from the free Sunday ticket given to locals. My children and grandchildren (ranging in age from 3 to 50) will join us this year and there will be something for all of us. I feel privileged to live in this glorious area and am glad to share it with others. Within a fortnight, all vestiges will have disappeared and we can return to our 'normally sleepy hollows'.Linda DaviesNorth Wootton, Somerset Sir, I take issue with Alan Ward's suggestion that 'there are many more for whom a life on benefits is always going to be preferable to getting out of bed every morning to go to a job that is likely to be thankless, tedious and not even financially beneficial' (letter, Jun 26). In my experience of being forced on to benefits because work was not available — or because men aged over 50 were not wanted — I found few who enjoyed the experience. Benefits are too low to 'live on', and those seeking work (whether fit or otherwise) wish for routine, company and the sense of worth that work gives, even when it is badly paid. It is just not possible to live on benefits. Many of us now struggle to survive on a pension, so how can anyone survive on benefits, which pay much less? If Mr Ward knows those who can do it there are many who would like to learn from HerriottBraintree, Essex Sir, Further to the letters on weight-loss drugs (Jun 26), I was in a school class with 32 other boys and I never knew anyone who was overweight. Of course, we had the perfect stimulus to avoid being overweight: it was called rationing. It worked, and as far as I know no one died from it. Maybe the government should start issuing ration books SharpScarborough, N Yorks Sir, My Oxford interviewers asked me to define a gentleman (letters, Jun 23 to 26). Frantically I cited Chaucer's Knight ('a verray, parfit gentil knyght') and stepping out of a lift to expel wind. It proved insufficiently intellectual for a scholarship but did sneak me in as a BrooksSutton Coldfield, W Midlands Sir, My late father, a dyed-in-the-wool Yorkshireman, once stated that a gentleman would always hold the door open for his wife when she brought the coal JordanTimperley, Cheshire Write to letters@
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
'It'll push disabled people into poverty': Labour's controversial welfare bill
Labour has been in turmoil over the most controversial piece of legislation of Keir Starmer's premiership: a major overhaul of the benefits system. The government says the welfare bill is out of control – largely because of the huge rise in people claiming personal independence payments (Pip). More than 120 Labour MPs were poised to rebel, and yesterday Starmer was promising to make concessions. But for the 3.7 million people who rely on Pip to pay the extra costs associated with having a disability, it has been an incredibly worrying time, says the Guardian columnist Frances Ryan. Pip is essential for the extra costs incurred by disabled people, she says. 'It's about being able to afford to pay the care fees so that you can wash your hair. It's about having enough money to charge your electric wheelchair so you're not housebound.' She says the 'toxic' rhetoric around disability that the political debate inspires is also hugely damaging. Ryan has just written a book, Who Wants Normal? The Disabled Girls' Guide to Life, and has spoken to 70 well-known women living with a disability. In her interviews, one thing came across clearly: the message given to disabled people by society is that they do not have a right to be included, whether that is at school, in the workplace or at university. And, she says, the government's 'quick fix' attitude to reducing the benefits bill, rather than looking at the barriers people with disability face while trying to work, is part of the problem.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Government announces concessions to welfare bill after talks
A letter from Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall to MPs said adjustments to universal credit would also see incomes protected. The announcement comes after crisis talks with backbenchers, with some 126 MPs within the party signing an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks. Sir Keir Starmer's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill has its second reading on Tuesday, the first opportunity for MPs to support or reject it. A spokesperson for Number 10 said: 'We have listened to MPs who support the principle of reform but are worried about the pace of change for those already supported by the system. 'This package will preserve the social security system for those who need it by putting it on a sustainable footing, provide dignity for those unable to work, supports those who can and reduce anxiety for those currently in the system. 'Our reforms are underpinned by Labour values and our determination to deliver the change the country voted for last year.' The Government's original package restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limited the sickness-related element of universal credit. Existing claimants were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. In her letter, the Work and Pensions Secretary said: 'We recognise the proposed changes have been a source of uncertainty and anxiety. 'We will ensure that all of those currently receiving PIP will stay within the current system. The new eligibility requirements will be implemented from November 2026 for new claims only. 'Secondly, we will adjust the pathway of Universal Credit payment rates to make sure all existing recipients of the UC health element – and any new claimant meeting the severe conditions criteria – have their incomes fully protected in real terms.' She said a ministerial review would ensure the benefit is 'fair and fit for the future' and will be a 'coproduction' with disabled people, organisations which represent them and MPs. 'These important reforms are rooted in Labour values, and we want to get them right,' she said. The change in Pip payments would protect some 370,000 existing claimants who were expected to lose out following reassessment. If the legislation clears its first hurdle on Tuesday, it will then face a few hours' examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee tasked with looking at the Bill. The so-called 'reasoned amendment' tabled by Treasury select committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier had argued that disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. She said: 'This is a good deal. It is massive changes to ensure the most vulnerable people are protected… and, crucially, involving disabled people themselves in the design of future benefit changes.' While the concessions look set to reassure some of those who had been leading the rebellion, other MPs remained opposed before the announcement. Speaking to the PA news agency before the concessions were revealed, Rachel Maskell said: 'As the Government is seeking to reform the system, they should protect all disabled people until they have completed their co-produced consultation and co-produced implementation. 'I cannot vote for something that will have such a significant impact … as disabled people are not involved, it is just a backroom deal.' One MP said that ministers would need to 'go back to the drawing board' to make the Bill acceptable. Another said they expected the legislation would get through second reading if the Government conceded the key sticking points relating to existing Pip claimants, the health element of universal credit and a policy consultation. 'It would need to be in the Bill, not just a commitment,' they said. Speaking in the Commons on Wednesday, Sir Keir told MPs he wanted the reforms to reflect 'Labour values of fairness' and that discussions about the changes would continue over the coming days. He insisted there was 'consensus across the House on the urgent need for reform' of the 'broken' welfare system. 'I know colleagues across the House are eager to start fixing that, and so am I, and that all colleagues want to get this right, and so do I,' he said. 'We want to see reform implemented with Labour values of fairness. 'That conversation will continue in the coming days, so we can begin making change together on Tuesday.' There was a mixed reaction among charities to the prospect of concessions. Learning disability charity Mencap said the news would be a 'huge relief to thousands of people living in fear of what the future holds'. 'It is the right thing to do and sends a clear message – cutting disability benefits is not a fair way to mend the black hole in the public purse,' director of strategy Jackie O'Sullivan said. But the MS Society urged rebels to hold firm and block the Bill, insisting any Government offer to water down the reforms would amount to 'kicking the can down the road and delaying an inevitable disaster'. Head of campaigns at the charity, Charlotte Gill, said: 'We urge MPs not to be swayed by these last-ditch attempts to force through a harmful Bill with supposed concessions. 'The only way to avoid a catastrophe today and in the future is to stop the cuts altogether by halting the Bill in its tracks.' The Tories described concessions as 'the latest in a growing list of screeching U-turns' from the Government. Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said: 'Under pressure from his own MPs, Starmer has made another completely unfunded spending commitment. 'Labour's welfare chaos will cost hardworking taxpayers. 'We can't afford Labour.'
