Starmer scales back UK welfare cuts amid Labour rebellion
LONDON: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer sharply scaled back planned welfare cuts on Friday to quell a rebellion by lawmakers in his governing Labour Party, the latest U-turn to dent his authority just a year after winning power.
Planned changes to make it tougher to collect some disability and sickness benefits would now apply only to new applicants, while the millions of people who already rely on the benefits will no longer be affected, the government said.
More than 100 Labour lawmakers had publicly opposed Starmer's reforms, which sought to shave 5 billion pounds ($7 billion) per year off a rapidly rising welfare bill.
The rebellion had meant Starmer faced a potential defeat in a vote on the changes in parliament next week - a year after he won a landslide majority in a national election.
'We have listened to MPs (members of parliament) who support the principle of reform but are worried about the pace of change for those already supported by the system,' a spokesperson for Starmer's office said.
In a letter to lawmakers, work and pensions minister Liz Kendall confirmed that only new claimants would be subject to the planned tightening of eligibility.
'Our reform principles remain; to target funding for those most in need and make sure the system is sustainable for the future to support generations to come,' Kendall said.
Labour lawmaker Meg Hillier, who chairs an influential parliamentary committee and had spearheaded the efforts to water down the bill, welcomed the government's move as 'a good and workable compromise'.
U-TURN
The government did not set out the cost of the change in policy. Care minister Stephen Kinnock said that details would come in the next budget, which is due in the autumn.
Ruth Curtice, chief executive of think tank Resolution Foundation and a former senior finance ministry official, said the compromise would reduce the government's savings by around 3 billion pounds a year of the original planned 5 billion.
It was the third big U-turn for Starmer's government, following a reversal in unpopular cuts to payments to pensioners for fuel to heat homes in the winter, and a decision to hold an inquiry into the authorities' response to gangs that groomed girls for sex, after having said no such inquiry was needed.
Starmer has argued that Britain's disability benefits system is too costly to sustain, and makes it too difficult for people who can work to do so, by penalising them for their earnings.
Campaigners said that even if existing claimants are exempt, the changes would still harm too many people. Disability UK, a charity, said it rejected a 'two-tier system' that would deny new claimants benefits that existing claimants can receive.
'It is not a massive concession to have a benefit system where future generations of disabled people receive less support than disabled people today,' said Mikey Erhardt, the group's policy lead.
The opposition Conservative Party's work and pensions policy chief, Helen Whately, said the decision was humiliating for Starmer, and represented a missed opportunity to cut the welfare bill.
'Starmer ducked the challenge - leaving taxpayers to pick up the bill,' she said in a post on X.
Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds Britain's defence budget and is set to top 100 billion pounds by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from 65 billion pounds now.
But the plans to cut payments to some of the most vulnerable in society have proven particularly painful for lawmakers in the centre-left Labour Party, which founded the state-run National Health Service and sees itself as the protector of the welfare state built after World War Two.
Despite Starmer's concessions, one Labour lawmaker, Peter Lamb, said he would still vote down the bill 'alone' if necessary.
'To me, it's insufficient when better options have repeatedly been put forward and ignored,' Lamb said on X. ($1 = 0.7275 pounds)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
London climate week receives boost as Trump policies weigh on New York event
LONDON (Reuters) -London's climate week attracted record attendance, bolstered by the cloud hanging over its sister event in New York in September as the U.S. government turns its back on efforts to stop global warming and tightens entry requirements. The annual London Climate Action Week (LCAW), which ends on Sunday, more than doubled in size compared to the 2024 edition, hosting 700-plus events and more than 45,000 attendees. That was helped by the UK's more robust stance on climate action and support for visitors from developing countries, two dozen business, political and civil society sources told Reuters. "We have gone much bigger on LCAW this year - we are hosting several events and putting considerably more effort (in) than in the past. If we do send someone to New York, it will almost certainly just be an American citizen member of our team," said Alexis McGivern, Head of Stakeholder Engagement at Oxford Net Zero. Under President Donald Trump, the United States has left a global deal to lower climate-damaging carbon emissions, cut development aid, rowed back on environmental standards and moved to slash support for green technologies. By contrast, the British government was present across multiple events during LCAW, with energy secretary Ed Miliband saying he wanted Britain to be a "clean energy superpower" and to "get off the roller coaster of fossil fuel markets". 'YOU CAN TALK FRANKLY' Given the U.S. pushback, Hindou Oumarou Ibrahim, a U.N. Indigenous Peoples representative and climate change expert, said London offered more freedom to discuss climate change, diversity and human rights. "You can talk frankly with the government of the UK or any government here in London without being afraid of how you get treated, or targeted," she said. Philanthropists and private investors, too, are able to speak more openly without being targeted politically, or risking damaging business interests, she said. "This year the New York Climate Week is going to be very challenging," she said. "Not only to indigenous peoples, but even to governments. There are so many barriers that are making people say, let's act now in London." Among steps taken in London was a push by governments for indigenous peoples' land rights to be better protected and a plan to encourage companies to buy more carbon credits. Chief among the concerns about New York, particularly for civil society representatives, was whether they could even get in. TRAVEL BANS This month, the U.S. banned travellers from countries including Afghanistan, Congo Republic and Somalia - many exposed to rising extreme weather events and in need of the most help - and may yet add more. Ibrahim, whose home country Chad is also on the list, said she would travel using her diplomatic passport but was uncertain if she would be allowed in - a concern flagged by half a dozen other LCAW attendees. Helen Clarkson, CEO of Climate Group, which runs New York Climate Week, said she understood it would be harder for participants from certain countries to attend but that many businesses, governments and civil society were planning to come and were "super up for New York." " is shaping up similar to other years," she said. "This is a critical moment before COP." COP30 will take place in Brazil in November. (Reporting by Virginia Furness and Simon Jessop; Editing by Aidan Lewis)
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
Barclays CEO welcomes possible end to Trump retaliatory tax
THE CEO of Barclays has welcomed indications that U.S. Republicans may scrap the Section 899 retaliatory tax proposal from their tax and spending bill. 'The developments on 899 are welcome progress and a significant outcome for a great many UK companies like Barclays that invest in the US and support economic growth in both countries,' Barclays CEO C.S. Venkatakrishnan told Reuters in an emailed statement. It is unusual for a British bank CEO to criticise a specific policy of U.S. President Donald Trump. Multinational companies with operations in the United States have been lobbying through industry groups against Section 899, warning about the potential impact on their investment plans in the country. Section 899 would have enabled President Donald Trump to retaliate against countries that impose taxes on U.S. firms under a 2021 global tax agreement that Trump considers unfair. The agreement is 'another important sign of the close working relationship between the UK Chancellor and US Treasury Secretary which is critical for UK and US businesses,' Venkatakrishnan said.
The Sun
6 hours ago
- The Sun
Starmer scales back UK welfare cuts amid Labour rebellion
LONDON: British Prime Minister Keir Starmer sharply scaled back planned welfare cuts on Friday to quell a rebellion by lawmakers in his governing Labour Party, the latest U-turn to dent his authority just a year after winning power. Planned changes to make it tougher to collect some disability and sickness benefits would now apply only to new applicants, while the millions of people who already rely on the benefits will no longer be affected, the government said. More than 100 Labour lawmakers had publicly opposed Starmer's reforms, which sought to shave 5 billion pounds ($7 billion) per year off a rapidly rising welfare bill. The rebellion had meant Starmer faced a potential defeat in a vote on the changes in parliament next week - a year after he won a landslide majority in a national election. 'We have listened to MPs (members of parliament) who support the principle of reform but are worried about the pace of change for those already supported by the system,' a spokesperson for Starmer's office said. In a letter to lawmakers, work and pensions minister Liz Kendall confirmed that only new claimants would be subject to the planned tightening of eligibility. 'Our reform principles remain; to target funding for those most in need and make sure the system is sustainable for the future to support generations to come,' Kendall said. Labour lawmaker Meg Hillier, who chairs an influential parliamentary committee and had spearheaded the efforts to water down the bill, welcomed the government's move as 'a good and workable compromise'. U-TURN The government did not set out the cost of the change in policy. Care minister Stephen Kinnock said that details would come in the next budget, which is due in the autumn. Ruth Curtice, chief executive of think tank Resolution Foundation and a former senior finance ministry official, said the compromise would reduce the government's savings by around 3 billion pounds a year of the original planned 5 billion. It was the third big U-turn for Starmer's government, following a reversal in unpopular cuts to payments to pensioners for fuel to heat homes in the winter, and a decision to hold an inquiry into the authorities' response to gangs that groomed girls for sex, after having said no such inquiry was needed. Starmer has argued that Britain's disability benefits system is too costly to sustain, and makes it too difficult for people who can work to do so, by penalising them for their earnings. Campaigners said that even if existing claimants are exempt, the changes would still harm too many people. Disability UK, a charity, said it rejected a 'two-tier system' that would deny new claimants benefits that existing claimants can receive. 'It is not a massive concession to have a benefit system where future generations of disabled people receive less support than disabled people today,' said Mikey Erhardt, the group's policy lead. The opposition Conservative Party's work and pensions policy chief, Helen Whately, said the decision was humiliating for Starmer, and represented a missed opportunity to cut the welfare bill. 'Starmer ducked the challenge - leaving taxpayers to pick up the bill,' she said in a post on X. Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds Britain's defence budget and is set to top 100 billion pounds by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from 65 billion pounds now. But the plans to cut payments to some of the most vulnerable in society have proven particularly painful for lawmakers in the centre-left Labour Party, which founded the state-run National Health Service and sees itself as the protector of the welfare state built after World War Two. Despite Starmer's concessions, one Labour lawmaker, Peter Lamb, said he would still vote down the bill 'alone' if necessary. 'To me, it's insufficient when better options have repeatedly been put forward and ignored,' Lamb said on X. ($1 = 0.7275 pounds)
