Liz Kendall to face MPs ahead of major PIP welfare vote
In a dramatic climbdown last week after a major revolt by over 100 Labour MPs, the PM agreed to protect all existing claimants from losing Personal Independence Payments. The changes to PIP - the key disability benefit will now only apply to new claims from November 2026, at a cost of around £3billion to the government.
But disability charities have warned the new measures will create a "two-tier" system for disability benefits - and are still urging MPs to vote down the legislation at Tuesday's crunch vote.
While some Labour MPs have said they will now back the government after last week's concessions, Keir Starmer is still facing a major rebellion, with 50-60 Labour MPs still said to be considering voting against the government tomorrow. It would be the biggest revolt of Mr Starmer's premiership so far.
Disabled people could face extra costs of almost £15,000 a year by the end of the decade, grim research shows, as the row over the Government's welfare cuts drags on.
Research released by disability charity Scope has estimated the extra monthly costs related to a person's disability have now risen to £1,095. Even for those who receive benefits, there is an average shortfall of £630 every month, as the payments don't go far enough, Scope said.
The Disability Price Tag report, which is released annually by Scope and does not take into account the welfare reforms, estimates this is set to rise to £1,224 by 2029/30, totalling almost £15,000 a year. It would mean those with a disability would see a £704 shortfall in their benefits income by 2029, the study said.
Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham told an event at Glastonbury Festival that MPs should still vote against the welfare bill tomorrow. 'It's simply wrong and I will never, ever support what is being proposed,' he said.
'This reminds me why I left Westminster because the default mindset of the two parties is to be tough on benefits. That mentality creates a deficit model that is distrustful of people… a system I know many disabled people fear interacting with."
Dozens of Labour MPs are still said to be on the fence about whether to support plans to reform the welfare system in a crunch vote on Tuesday.
Many MPs spent the weekend mulling over a major package of concessions offered by Keir Starmer last week. In a dramatic climbdown on Thursday, the PM agreed to protect all existing claimants from losing Personal Independence Payments (PIP).
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is expected to deliver a Commons statement today - setting out major concessions on the welfare bill reached with rebels last week. Expect Ms Kendall to appear in the Commons after 1530 if the Speaker agrees to a government statement.
In a dramatic climbdown last week after a major revolt by over 100 Labour MPs, the PM agreed to protect all existing claimants from losing Personal Independence Payments. The changes to PIP - the key disability benefit will now only apply to new claims from November 2026, at a cost of around £3billion to the government.
Plans for a major review of PIP for new claims will also be set out today, which will be co-produced by disabled people, organisations who represent them and MPs.
It is hoped that the terms of the review - which will place disabled people at the heart of it - will persuade nervy MPs that the legislation is now heading in the right direction.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
26 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Badenoch urges Tory councils to challenge asylum hotels in court
In a letter to Tory councils, Mrs Badenoch said she was 'encouraging' them to 'take the same steps' as Epping Council 'if your legal advice supports it'. Labour dismissed her letter as 'desperate and hypocritical nonsense', but several of its own local authorities have already suggested they too could mount legal action against asylum hotels in their areas. Epping secured a temporary injunction from the High Court on Tuesday, blocking the use of the Essex town's Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers on planning grounds. The decision has prompted councils controlled by Labour, the Conservatives and Reform UK to investigate whether they could pursue a similar course of action. Kemi Badenoch said she would back Tory councils that wanted to pursue similar action to Epping (Lucy North/PA) These include Labour-run Tamworth and Wirral councils, Tory-run Broxbourne and East Lindsey councils and Reform's Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire councils. But Labour's Newcastle City Council and Brighton and Hove City Council have both ruled out legal action. Tuesday's High Court decision has also caused a potential headache for the Home Office, which has a legal duty to house destitute asylum seekers while their claims are being dealt with. If planning laws prevent the Government from using hotels, ministers will face a scramble to find alternative accommodation, potentially in the private rented sector. In her letter, Mrs Badenoch praised Epping Council's legal challenge and told Tory councils she would 'back you to take similar action to protect your community'. But she added that the situation would 'depend on individual circumstances of the case' and suggested Tory councils could pursue 'other planning enforcement options'. She also accused Labour of 'trying to ram through such asylum hotels without consultation and without proper process', saying the Government had reopened the Bell Hotel as asylum accommodation after the Conservatives had closed it. The hotel had previously been used as asylum accommodation briefly in 2020 and then between 2022 and 2024 under the previous Conservative government. A Labour spokesperson said Mrs Badenoch's letter was a 'pathetic stunt' and 'desperate and hypocritical nonsense from the architects of the broken asylum system', saying there were now '20,000 fewer asylum seekers in hotels than at their peak under the Tories'. The letter comes ahead of the publication on Thursday of figures showing how many asylum seekers were being temporarily housed in hotels at the end of June this year. Home Office figures from the previous quarter show there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March. This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079, and 6% lower than the 34,530 at the same point a year earlier. Figures on those staying in hotels date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023, when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels. Data is not released on the number of hotels in use, but it is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023. Labour has said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210.
Western Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Badenoch urges Tory councils to challenge asylum hotels in court
In a letter to Tory councils, Mrs Badenoch said she was 'encouraging' them to 'take the same steps' as Epping Council 'if your legal advice supports it'. Labour dismissed her letter as 'desperate and hypocritical nonsense', but several of its own local authorities have already suggested they too could mount legal action against asylum hotels in their areas. Epping secured a temporary injunction from the High Court on Tuesday, blocking the use of the Essex town's Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers on planning grounds. The decision has prompted councils controlled by Labour, the Conservatives and Reform UK to investigate whether they could pursue a similar course of action. Kemi Badenoch said she would back Tory councils that wanted to pursue similar action to Epping (Lucy North/PA) These include Labour-run Tamworth and Wirral councils, Tory-run Broxbourne and East Lindsey councils and Reform's Staffordshire and West Northamptonshire councils. But Labour's Newcastle City Council and Brighton and Hove City Council have both ruled out legal action. Tuesday's High Court decision has also caused a potential headache for the Home Office, which has a legal duty to house destitute asylum seekers while their claims are being dealt with. If planning laws prevent the Government from using hotels, ministers will face a scramble to find alternative accommodation, potentially in the private rented sector. In her letter, Mrs Badenoch praised Epping Council's legal challenge and told Tory councils she would 'back you to take similar action to protect your community'. But she added that the situation would 'depend on individual circumstances of the case' and suggested Tory councils could pursue 'other planning enforcement options'. She also accused Labour of 'trying to ram through such asylum hotels without consultation and without proper process', saying the Government had reopened the Bell Hotel as asylum accommodation after the Conservatives had closed it. The hotel had previously been used as asylum accommodation briefly in 2020 and then between 2022 and 2024 under the previous Conservative government. 32,345 Asylum seekers living in hotels at the end of March 2025 A Labour spokesperson said Mrs Badenoch's letter was a 'pathetic stunt' and 'desperate and hypocritical nonsense from the architects of the broken asylum system', saying there were now '20,000 fewer asylum seekers in hotels than at their peak under the Tories'. The letter comes ahead of the publication on Thursday of figures showing how many asylum seekers were being temporarily housed in hotels at the end of June this year. Home Office figures from the previous quarter show there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March. This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079, and 6% lower than the 34,530 at the same point a year earlier. Figures on those staying in hotels date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023, when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels. Data is not released on the number of hotels in use, but it is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023. Labour has said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210.
Times
37 minutes ago
- Times
Rachel Reeves warned that new taxes will hit living standards
Britain's biggest retailers have warned Rachel Reeves that Labour's core manifesto pledge to improve living standards will be put at risk if she pushes ahead with further tax rises in her budget. Some of Britain's biggest companies, including Tesco, Sainsbury's, John Lewis and Boots, have warned the chancellor that food price inflation could hit 6 per cent this year because of the government's tax rises and policies such as the increase in the minimum wage. In a highly political intervention, the retailers are writing to the chancellor to warn that further taxes on businesses in the autumn budget could lead to Sir Keir Starmer breaching his manifesto pledge to provide 'good jobs and higher living standards'. They suggest they will not be able to 'absorb' further tax rises and prices will have to rise.
