logo
Rattled Starmer scrapes through on welfare reform after last-minute concession to rebel MPs

Rattled Starmer scrapes through on welfare reform after last-minute concession to rebel MPs

Independent01-07-2025
Sir Keir Starmer has suffered the biggest blow to his leadership since coming into power a year ago after he was forced to abandon a key plank of his controversial benefit cuts in order to get them through parliament.
While his welfare reform bill passed its second reading by 335 votes to 260 – a majority of 75 – the prime minister still suffered the largest rebellion of his premiership so far, with 49 Labour MPs voting to reject the legislation.
It came after a last-ditch announcement that plans to restrict eligibility for personal independence payments (Pip) - which had been the central pillar of the government's reforms - were being dropped.
The chaotic move came just 90 minutes before MPs were due to vote for on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill for the first time, when disability minister Sir Stephen Timms announced that changes to Pip originally planned for November 2026 will not take place until after his review of the benefit has concluded.
Sir Keir had already been forced into a U-turn last week when more than 130 Labour MPs signed an amendment that would have effectively killed the bill off. Among the concessions announced then was a plan to impose tougher eligibility rules only on future Pip claimants, leaving existing recipients unaffected. Critics said this would create to a two tier system, while the government's own impact assessment said the change would push 150,000 people into poverty.
The latest climbdown will cause a major headache for chancellor Rachel Reeves; the welfare squeeze was intended to save £4.8 billion a year, already watered down to £2.3 billion last week. Postponing any changes to Pip means it is now uncertain how much the reforms will save.
Last night the the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) warned that the reforms package could even end up costing the taxpayer £100m by in 2029/30 if proposals to tighten eligibility for Pip are scrapped following the Timms review.
The vote followed a tense debate in which numerous Labour MPs criticised the plans and many more demanded they be postponed.
Paula Barker, Labour MP for Liverpool Wavertree, said: "Whilst grateful for the concessions, this has further laid bare the incoherent and shambolic nature of this process. It is the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen."
Meanwhile, Ian Lavery said the bill 'isn't fit for purpose'.
"I've never once seen a massive commitment given in a Bill like the minister gave in an intervention to a contribution. This is crazy, man. This is outrageous, man. This bill isn't fit for purpose', he said.
Opening the debate, work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall said: 'I do not believe that this is sustainable if we want a welfare state that protects people who most need our help for generations to come.'
She added: "There is no responsibility in leaving our system of social security to continue as it is, and risk support for it becoming so frayed that it is no longer there to provide a safety net for those who can never work, and who most need our help and support."
But she was met with immediate opposition from an amendment laid by Labour backbencher Rachael Maskell which would have killed the bill.
She described society as "dystopian", adding that the government should introduce a wealth tax rather than cutting benefits.
Ms Maskell's wrecking amendment was ultimately voted down - but was backed by 42 Labour MPs, highlighting the scale of consternation within Sir Keir's party.
Emma Lewell, one of 36 signatories of Ms Maskell's reasoned amendment, told the Commons: "I am sad that we have ended up here because no matter what, regardless of concessions, a vote for this Bill today is a vote to plunge 150,000 people into poverty and to tighten eligibility criteria for those who need support the most."
She added: "We are once again making disabled people pay the price for the economic mess that the party opposite left us. As it stands, we are being asked to vote blind today.'
Among many Labour MPs who stood up to criticise the plans was a highly emotional contribution by Dr Marie Tidball, a disabled MP.
Holding back tears, she said: "[During the Tory austerity years] I vowed then that I would do all I could to create a country which treats disabled people with dignity and respect.
"With a heavy, broken heart that I will be voting against the bill today. As a matter of conscience I need my constituents to know I cannot support the changes as currently drafted on the front of the bill."
The vote means that the legislation now goes to the next stages in parliament but leaves the possibility of another major rebellion for its third and final reading after the summer.
The government announced the plans earlier this year but disability groups have criticised it for failing to consult, especially over plans to make it more difficult to receive personal independence payments (Pips).
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch sought to capitalise on Sir Keir's discomfort, accusing ministers of 'utter capitulation' and saying the legislation was now 'pointless'.
'They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern', she said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Reform UK mayor under-fire over £1m community fund website
Reform UK mayor under-fire over £1m community fund website

The Independent

time29 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Reform UK mayor under-fire over £1m community fund website

One of Reform UK's metro mayors has been accused of misleading residents with a new website to promote a £1 million community fund. Olympic boxing champion and mayor of Hull and East Yorkshire Luke Campbell launched his fund last week with a website that invites locals to submit projects for consideration. But a Lib Dem councillor has accused Mr Campbell of using the website to harvest data for his Reform UK party, and of failing to get the appropriate sign-offs for his fund. In a video posted on his social media at the weekend, the mayor said: 'Exciting news. We have a £1 million community fund. 'This is a million pounds every year, for the next four years. 'I want to hand over the decision to the people of this region. 'Please tell me where you want to see this money being spent. It's all down to you.' Writing on X, councillor Tom Astell said that, although the website carries Hull and East Yorkshire Combined Authority branding, it is actually promoted by Reform UK. Mr Astell said: 'Your personal data goes to the party — not the Authority.' The councillor said: 'And the £1m fund? It doesn't exist. 'It has never been through the Combined Authority Executive Board. No decision. No approval. 'It's not even clear if the Combined Authority actually has the ability or monies available for such a fund.' Mr Astell said any spending of more than £250,000 has to be approved by the executive board as a 'key decision'. He said: 'So residents are being invited to pitch ideas for a fund that hasn't been agreed — while handing their data to a political party. 'This is a serious breach of trust. Public branding. Party data collection. A non-existent fund. Residents deserve honesty.' Mr Astell, who represents a ward in town of Beverley on East Riding of Yorkshire Council, said he has written to the combined authority's interim chief executive Mark Rogers about his concerns. He said: 'Public office is a public trust. Hull & East Yorkshire deserves honesty, not smoke and mirrors.' Mr Campbell was elected in May 2024, becoming one of two Reform metro mayors, along with Dame Andrea Jenkyns in Greater Lincolnshire. He won a gold medal at the 2012 London Olympics before embarking on a successful pro boxing career. The mayor's office has been approached for a comment.

Calm down, homeowners – Rachel Reeves' property tax might be an improvement
Calm down, homeowners – Rachel Reeves' property tax might be an improvement

The Independent

time29 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Calm down, homeowners – Rachel Reeves' property tax might be an improvement

Another day, another idea that Rachel Reeves is said to be considering. It's as if the chancellor is putting suggestions out there to see what sticks. Either that, or she just wants to be seen to be busy and to let it be known she has considered all options before delivering her autumn Budget, which is when we will discover for certain. What is clear is that Reeves has a funding gap to fill, and the backdrop – of stretched national and local public services and a flatlining economy – isn't pretty. Nor too is a regime of anachronistic, complex and often unfair taxes, especially regarding homes. The latest possibility for dissection and reaction then, is a new property tax, to replace stamp duty and council tax. First up would be an annual tax to replace stamp duty on homes worth more than £500,000, to be paid by owner-occupiers. The amount charged would be based on the value of the property according to a rate set by the government; HMRC would collect payment. The annual levy would not apply to second homes because they would still be subject to stamp duty, including the 5 per cent second home surcharge. The aim of this new national property tax would be the creation of a revenue source that is more reliable and not so prone to fluctuations in the housing market as stamp duty. It would be more efficient and practical, reflective of a current Britain (stamp duty, the oldest of all taxes, was born in 1694) and, crucially, would not be such a drag on home sales. Properties in the bracket below £500,000, upwards of £250,000, would be freed. Given that the average price of a home in the UK was £272,664 according to Nationwide, most homes would be liberated, including starter homes. It would prove easier and cheaper to move house and encourage greater mobility. Inevitably, the new tax will, and is, already being criticised as another 'wealth tax'. Quickest out of the traps was Location, Location, Location presenter Kirstie Allsopp who decried the suggestion of a property tax as 'really destabilising for the property market – and when I say the property market, I mean people's homes. This government seems to want to punish people for making the sacrifices they've made to buy their own homes.' Reeves and her advisers are letting it be known that they are following a report from the centre-right (so not leftist) think tank, Onward. It was Onward that came up with the £250,000-to-£500,000 net. Under the Onward plan, the suggested annual rate above £500,000 would be 0.54 per cent, and a home worth more than £1m would pay 0.81 per cent on the portion over that limit. Important, given the state of the nation's finances, is the possibility it will not actually raise more than stamp duty. Onward's recommendation that it should not be retrospective would mean stamp duty would not be scrapped in one go, the substitute being phased in gradually. So, it is no fiscal panacea, rather a nice thing to have. Onward also recommended ditching council tax, also loathed by left and right, and introducing a local proportional property tax. It would be charged yearly to homeowners, not residents, on properties up to £500,000. Like council tax, the rate would be set by local authorities, but Onward's guide of 0.44 per cent would mean a maximum bill of £2,196 a year, payable to the council. With properties worth more than £500,000, the government will step in and take an additional 0.54 per cent, also annually, on the portion above £500,000. Out would go the outdated and flawed council tax banding system assessed on property values from 1991. It would be fairer and would allow councils to retain a strong lever over their own finances. It could head off some of the council bankruptcies that are brewing. Unfortunately, though, it too is unlikely to prove a quick fix – experts are predicting it will take a while to implement. A test for Reeves and for Sir Keir Starmer would be, given their talk of wanting to go 'further and faster' and their commitment to removing bureaucracy, is just how soon any of these changes could come on-stream. The new local tax is also not especially redistributive – poor areas would still remain disadvantaged, affluent ones would still be able to bask in their good fortune. The new, national and local property tax would enjoy another advantage, in that Britain would operate under one structure. At present, stamp duty exists in England and Northern Ireland – Wales and Scotland do it their way. This would cut across, and while it might not be popular with nationalists it would be uniform. Above all, what is under discussion, if it is Onward, bearing in mind that other think tanks have their own ideas, is more appealing than the current mess. It is true that it is not hard, that anything would be better, but this does begin to feel like genuine reform and modernisation.

‘Brazen' Labour councillor ‘manipulated' and sexually abused 15-year-old
‘Brazen' Labour councillor ‘manipulated' and sexually abused 15-year-old

Telegraph

time29 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

‘Brazen' Labour councillor ‘manipulated' and sexually abused 15-year-old

A 'brazen' Labour councillor who 'manipulated' and sexually abused a 15-year-old girl has been jailed. David Graham, who represented the Buckhaven, Methil and Wemyss Villages ward on Fife council in Scotland, has been sentenced to 27 months in prison after being convicted of having sex with a child aged 15. The offences happened over several months in 2023 in Edinburgh and Fife after the pair met socially. The 43-year-old, who was suspended from the Labour Party two years ago, denied the charge but was convicted by a majority verdict. He was released on bail following his conviction, and has also been disqualified by the Labour-run council. The court heard that a 'romantic relationship' involving a 25-year age gap developed shortly after the girl's 15th birthday and became 'more intimate'. 'Undermined the trust' Sheriff Robert More described the offences, between February and August 2023, as an 'escalating and brazen course of sexual behaviour' and said Graham had 'undermined the trust' placed in him by the community. Graham, who was 40 or 41-years-old at the time of the offending, was 'well-known' in the area and perceived as 'a hard-working and diligent local representative', the court heard. The sheriff said the single charge amounted to three offences, including engaging in sex activity with an older child, along with evidence of 'planning' to avoid detection. He imposed a sentence of 27 months and said that the case was of 'higher culpability'. Graham will also be on the sex offenders register for 10 years. Sheriff More, sentencing, said: 'The conduct took place at a variety of locations, including the home you shared with your then partner. You were aware of how old the girl was and had been warned by her family to stay away from her. 'Laws are intended to protect children from those who would exploit their vulnerability. There is nothing to suggest she was physically harmed or evidence that she has suffered psychological harm. In my view, there is a real risk your offending will have such a psychological impact.' 'Avoid being recognised' He said there was evidence of instances in which Graham tried to 'remove [himself]' from the local area 'to avoid being recognised'. Riot police were called to a mass protest outside Graham's home, involving around 100 people and leading to three arrests, the court heard. His parents' home was also targeted. Chris Sneddon, acting for Graham, said there was the 'potential for community reprisal' but urged a non-custodial sentence be imposed. He said that Graham continues to deny the charge but 'understands the impact the type of behaviour can have on the victim of such behaviour', the court heard. 'A manipulative individual' Detective Inspector Graham Watson, said: 'Graham is a manipulative individual who groomed and sexually abused his teenage victim. He was well-known and in a position of power when the offending took place.' Helen Nisbet, the Procurator Fiscal for Tayside, Central and Fife, said: 'David Graham saw an opportunity to systematically groom and sexually abuse a vulnerable young girl, who had the right to be safe in his company. 'He cynically and deliberately took advantage of an unbalanced power dynamic to commit these offences over the course of several months.' 'Disqualified from serving as a councillor' Following the sentencing, David Ross, the Fife council leader, said: 'This case has shocked us all and I am pleased that this means David Graham will now be disqualified from serving as a councillor on Fife council.' 'David Graham should have resigned as a councillor as soon as he was convicted, if not before, and his disqualification will be welcomed across the council.' The authority said a by-election would be held in Graham's former ward in the next few months. An NSPCC spokesman said: 'Graham held a position of trust and authority in the community, which he chose to exploit to groom and sexually abuse a vulnerable teenage girl. She has shown immense courage in helping to ensure that Graham faced justice for his crimes.'

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