Labour MPs signal rebellion over welfare cuts
A number of Labour MPs have said they will vote against the government's proposed cuts to disability benefits.
Nine Labour MPs voiced concern over the government's plans to make it harder for people with less severe conditions to claim disability payments during a debate on Wednesday.
Calls to rethink the benefits cuts, as well as other policies, have been growing after Labour lost 187 council seats during the local election last week.
Disability minister Sir Stephen Timms told the MPs the goal of the reforms was to make sure the welfare system was "financially sustainable in the long term".
In March, the government announced a major welfare shake-up aimed at saving money and supporting people who can work to find jobs.
Ministers said changes to a key disability benefit called personal independence payment (Pip) and universal credit (UC) would save around £5bn a year by the end of 2030 and get more people into work.
Overall, the government spends £65bn a year on health and disability-related benefits. Before the government announced the Pip and UC changes, this was projected to increase to £100bn by 2029.
The government estimated that 3.2 million families could be worse off as a result of the reforms, while 3.8 million families will be better off by 2030.
The government is expected to pass a new law to make the welfare changes, giving MPs a chance to vote on the plans.
Backbench discontent
Speaking during the debate in Westminster Hall, Diane Abbott, the Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington, said the government was "making a conscious choice to balance its books on the backs of people on welfare".
Ian Byrne, who represents Liverpool West Derby, said he would "swim through vomit to vote against" proposed welfare changes.
Labour MPs Richard Burgon, Rachael Maskell, Andy McDonald, Cat Eccles, Nadia Whittome, Imran Hussain, Steve Witherden and Ian Lavery also said they would vote against the government's proposals.
They were joined by John McDonnell, an independent MP for Hayes and Harlington who had the whip removed by Labour for rebelling against the government over the two-child benefit cap.
A number of other Labour MPs have also indicated they are minded to oppose the benefits cuts in comments at events, in articles for local papers, as well as on social media.
Disability minister Sir Stephen Timms defended the proposals, saying it was not sustainable for welfare spending to rise at the current rate.
"The current system produces poor employment outcomes, high economic inactivity, low living standards, high costs to the taxpayer. It needs to change," he said.
"We want a more proactive, pro-work system that supports people better and supports the economy as well."
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has come under increasing pressure to change course on some policy decisions.
At Prime Minister Questions on Wednesday, Sir Keir defended the decision to axe winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners.
It came after a group of about 45 Labour MPs representing seats in northern England and the Midlands joined those urging the government to rethink the move.
The planned changes to disability benefits could become the next big political flashpoint, with legislation likely to be brought to the House of Commons in June.
The BBC has been told some potential rebels are being assured they won't lose the party whip if they abstain – or make themselves scarce – when the vote comes.
The government is not at risk of defeat, given Labour has a large majority, but a sizable rebellion could show the extent of the discontent within the party.
Senior minister Pat McFadden said "we have to win the fight for Britain's future" while speaking at the Parliamentary Labour Party's first gathering since the local elections, party sources said.
The Cabinet Office minister criticised Reform UK, including the new mayor of Greater Lincolnshire, Dame Andrea Jenkyns, who said her party would "reset Britain to its glorious past" in her victory speech.
McFadden said: "Labour is always at its best when we look to the future. This is the fight of our lives, this is the generational fight in this new political era.
"I want to tell you we have to take on this new fight for the future - and we have to win."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Reeves announces £6 billion to provide millions of NHS tests and procedures
Rachel Reeves has announced a £6 billion investment to speed up tests and treatment within the NHS, after setting out huge year-on-year rises in the health service's budget. New scanners, ambulances and urgent treatment centres are among the things which the additional cash will pay for, with the aim of providing up to four million more tests and procedures over the next five years. The announcement comes after the Chancellor put NHS funding at the heart of her spending review on Wednesday, raising its budget in a move worth £29 billion a year. This comes, however, at the expense of other areas of public spending. The new £6 billion funding will help to meet the Government's target of reducing NHS waiting lists in England, the Chancellor claimed. 'Over a decade of underinvestment from the previous government put the NHS on its knees, with people across the country unable to get the care they need. We are investing in Britain's renewal, and we will turn that around,' Ms Reeves said. She added: 'Part of our record investment will deliver four million tests, scans and procedures, so hard-working people can get the healthcare they and their families need. 'There is no strong economy without a strong NHS, and we'll deliver on our Plan for Change to end the hospital backlog, improve living standards and get more money in people's pockets.' The latest spending commitment will help patients get access to diagnostic scans and treatment in places such as shopping centres and high streets, speeding up their diagnoses. The Government hopes this will help to cut NHS waiting lists, meeting Labour's goal of ensuring the health service carries out 92% of routine operations within 18 weeks. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: 'Since taking office we have been relentless in our drive to cut waiting times for patients, delivering over 3.6 million extra elective care appointments and reducing the overall waiting list by over 200,000. 'The £6 billion investment we are announcing today will generate millions more vital diagnostic tests, scans and procedures for patients across the country.' On Wednesday evening, Ms Reeves said the Government was 'confident' it could meet its pledge to reduce waiting lists after giving the NHS a 3% annual increase in funding at the spending review. Some health leaders are, however, sceptical that the Government will meet its target, despite the funding boost provided at the spending review. Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, which represents all health organisations, warned 'difficult decisions will still need to be made as this additional £29 billion won't be enough to cover the increasing cost of new treatments, with staff pay likely to account for a large proportion of it'. He added: 'So, on its own, this won't guarantee that waiting time targets are met.' Sarah Woolnough, chief executive of the King's Fund charity, said: 'The Chancellor said she wants the public to have an NHS there when they need it. 'It is hard to see how all the things she mentions: faster ambulance times, more GP appointments, and adequate mental health services and more can be met on this settlement alone. 'Particularly when large parts of this additional funding will be absorbed by existing rising costs, such as the higher cost of medicines, which are currently being negotiated, and covering staff pay deals.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Reeves's choices will make Britain poorer
The French statesman Pierre Mendes-France once said that to govern is to choose, and it was a maxim repeated often by the Chancellor in her spending statement to the Commons today. 'I have made my choices. In place of chaos, I choose stability. In place of decline, I choose investment. In place of retreat, I choose national renewal. These are my choices. These are this Government's choices. These are the British people's choices.' This might have sounded like a nice rhetorical flourish – an ironic echo of Mrs Thatcher quoting Francis of Assisi in 1979 – but what does it tell us about the Government's priorities? It is to continue spending money we do not earn and do not have because Labour is unwilling to take the difficult decisions necessary to reform the areas that cost the most to sustain, namely welfare and the NHS. The Treasury ostensibly spent months conducting what is called a zero-based spending review, testing budgets against whether they meet the Government's objectives and priorities. But who decides what they should be? An increase in defence spending has been forced on Labour and will be paid for from raiding the overseas aid budget. In a rare moment of candour the Chancellor admitted the 2.6 per cent of GDP would include spending on intelligence, not just the military. But Nato has asked for core spending of 3.5 per cent plus an additional 1.5 per cent for associated budgets. Labour will be nowhere near the requirement. That is their choice. Another priority is to allocate an extra £30 billion to 'our NHS' on top of the £22 billion already handed over when Labour took office last year. But where are the commensurate reforms that will ensure this is not wasted as so much money has been before? Wes Streeting has yet to unveil his masterplan for the NHS so we don't know; but history tells us to expect little in the way of change. Indeed, a renewed commitment to the nationalised ethos of the NHS, first set out in 1948, was cheered by MPs. That has ensured another decade of decline. Surely, with debt so high, the whole point of examining eye-watering levels of government spending is to try to bring it down, not tinker at the edges of departmental budgets while the overall amount balloons. But that is what we are seeing. The only savings she announced involved the closure of some public buildings, cutting back office costs and other 'efficiencies'. How often have we heard this before? Ms Reeves, who claims to have inherited a broken economy, has within the space of 12 months apparently so transformed its fortunes that she is able to splurge. She still believes that growth will provide the revenues even though her policies are inimical to economic expansion. Figures this week show the number of people in jobs has slumped at the fastest rate since 2014 directly as a result of the Chancellor's increase in employer National Insurance which took effect in the spring. How has that helped boost the economy? Ms Reeves made much of giving the go-ahead to extra investment in national infrastructure, such as roads, regional airports and local transport, which is undoubtedly needed, even though day to day spending will fall. All her hopes for growth rest on kick-starting major projects, including a swathe of social housebuilding schemes underpinned by a £39 billion investment over 10 years and reforms to planning laws to limit the scope for objections. But the industry says a serious shortage of skilled workers makes such promises impossible to fulfil. Moreover, will 'affordable housing' be filled by illegal immigrants ejected from hotels? The biggest issue is how to rein in spending on programmes that are spiralling out of control. Reforms of personal independence payments (PIPs) are in the pipeline but will they really go ahead? Labour Left-winger Richard Burgon said during Prime Minister's Questions that party backbenchers will not support the £5 billion cuts in a vote expected later this month. Scores of Labour MPs have signalled opposition and while Sir Keir Starmer stuck to his guns, this week's U-turn on the winter fuel allowance shows how he can buckle under pressure. The biggest problem facing the country is unsustainable debt, now around 100 per cent of GDP and record levels of taxation. Just paying the interest costs more than the defence budget and yet borrowing continues to grow. Nothing the Chancellor announced will reduce debt and everyone knows that she will have to raise taxes in the autumn or risk a market backlash. She keeps saying this is all being done to help 'working people' but they seem not to include the people who pay most tax, many of whom are already leaving the country. Net emigration among higher earners has reached its highest level since the financial crash. Like Labour chancellors of yore, she is spending money she does not have and will need to take more from wealth creators to fund it. Another French statesman, Jean-Baptiste Colbert, once said: 'The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest possible amount of feathers with the smallest possible amount of hissing.' The Chancellor has made her choice – not to pluck the goose that lays the golden egg, but to kill it. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Reeves ‘failed' to back English councils in spending review, MPs warn
Rachel Reeves has faced warnings that she 'failed' to back English councils in the spending review, including authorities which are effectively bankrupt. Woking MP Will Forster called on the Chancellor to 'justify' a 'lack of investment' into local government, and Tory Lewis Cocking said Labour's spending plans were 'devastating' for the sector. The Treasury will pump an additional £3.4 billion per year into councils by 2028/29, compared with 2024/25, which combined with yearly council tax rises is set to boost their spending power by 3.1% in real terms. But Mr Forster warned that 'in the detail of the statement', the Government 'is only investing an extra 1.1% in local government next year and the year after'. The Liberal Democrat MP told the Commons he was 'very disappointed' with the Chancellor's statement and asked: 'What does the Chancellor say to councils across the country and to my constituents of Woking to justify that lack of investment?' Ms Reeves replied: 'Well, that's real-terms increases in spending every year, that this Labour Government are giving to local authorities. 'And that compares to the Conservative-Liberal Democrat administration from 2010 to 2015 that cut real spending by 2.9% every year, so I'm much happier to stand on my record as Chancellor than what the Liberal Democrats did when they had a chance of being in government.' Woking issued a section 114 notice two years ago, in June 2023, when it faced having to plug a £1.2 billion deficit. Billpayers in the Surrey borough faced a 9.99% council tax rise the following year. Mr Forster, who is a member of the Commons Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, told the PA news agency: 'In today's spending review, the Chancellor has failed to invest in local government – and she is refusing to acknowledge the harm this will cause. 'In my constituency of Woking, our local authority has already gone bankrupt, I fear more will soon follow. Following the former Conservative administration bankrupting Woking, we have seen public toilets close.' He called on the Government to 'support councils more'. The spending review which Ms Reeves fronted on Wednesday pledged 'wider reforms' which 'will ensure funding is effectively targeted, based on an updated assessment of need, and will consolidate funding to give local authorities greater flexibility to innovate'. Local government reorganisation will 'improve the join-up between local services, enabling councils to deliver services more efficiently', according to The Treasury. Conservative MP for Broxbourne Mr Cocking, who is also a member of the Commons committee, described the spending review as 'devastating'. He said: 'Councils that are going through local government reorganisation, where councils that have been run really well, are going to be potentially lumbered into new super-unitary councils, with councils that haven't managed their finances well'. Mr Cocking said that where authorities merge, 'you'll find that residents that have got sound council finances, have had good services, are now going to be subsidising areas that have made bad decisions', and added that the spending review failed to compensate for this. Surrey's district and county councils are set to merge, with new single-tier authorities taking on town hall functions, as part of the Government's push towards 'unitary' councils throughout England set out in last year's English Devolution White Paper. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
