Ministers in talks over welfare concessions as Labour rebellion grows
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner said talks between backbenchers and Government were 'ongoing' on Wednesday night as Downing Street seeks to head off what would be Sir Keir Starmer's first Commons defeat.
It came as six more Labour MPs added their names to an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks, arguing disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed.
The new signatories include the Commons Environmental Audit Select Committee chairman Toby Perkins, Stoke-on-Trent Central MP Gareth Snell, Newcastle upon Tyne MP Mary Glindon and Tamworth MP Sarah Edwards.
North Ayrshire and Arran MP Irene Campbell and Colchester MP Pam Cox, both of whom won their seats in the party's 2024 landslide election victory, have also added their names.
The new names takes the total number of Labour backbenchers supporting the so-called 'reasoned amendment,' tabled by Treasury Select Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hiller, to 126.
The Prime Minister has insisted the reforms are set for a Commons vote on Tuesday as planned, but ministers are locked in talks with backbenchers about the possibility of making changes to soften the impact of the Bill as a major revolt looms.
Asked what concessions could be offered to convince rebels to back the Government, Ms Rayner sought to reassure backbenchers that they would not be expected to betray the party's traditional values.
'I'm not going to get into that on your show tonight,' she said in an interview on ITV's Peston programme.
'Those discussions are ongoing around making sure that the welfare reforms that we're bringing in support people into work who need that, and we're putting a huge amount of investment into doing that, but also protecting the most vulnerable.'
She acknowledged that 'a lot of people are very scared about these changes' but added: 'I haven't changed my Labour values and we're not expecting our benches to do anything that isn't in check with them.
'What we want to do is support people, and that is the crucial bit around these reforms of what Labour are trying to achieve, and we're discussing that with our MPs.'
The plans restrict eligibility for personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limit the sickness-related element of universal credit. The Government hopes the changes will get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year.
Existing claimants will be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support, a move seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes.
But the fact so many Labour MPs are prepared to put their names to the 'reasoned amendment' calling for a change of course shows how entrenched the opposition remains.
One backbencher preparing to vote against the Bill told the PA news agency: 'A lot of people have been saying they're upset about this for months. To leave it until a few days before the vote, it's not a very good way of running the country.
'It's not very grown up.'
They said that minor concessions would not be enough, warning: 'I don't think you can tinker with this. They need to go back to the drawing board.'
According to the Government's impact assessment, the welfare reforms as a whole could push an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, into relative poverty.
Asked whether she thought there were hundreds of thousands of people claiming disability benefits who were not disabled, Ms Rayner said: 'No, what we're saying though is that the welfare system has to be able to have longevity.'
Earlier on Wednesday, Sir Keir defended his leadership against accusations he had misjudged the mood in his party, insisting he is 'comfortable with reading the room'.
At a press conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, the Prime Minister said: 'Is it tough going? Are there plenty of people and noises off? Yes, of course, there always are, there always have been, there always will be.
'But the important thing is to focus on the change that we want to bring about.'
Later on Wednesday, armed forces minister Luke Pollard echoed the Deputy Prime Minister, telling Sky News's Politics Hub show that 'of course' the Government was in talks about possibly making changes.
'Of course we are, and I think there's a concern that's very valid and real for lots of my colleagues. They're not doing this to cause trouble or be argumentative,' he said.
'They're doing it because they have a genuine, heartfelt concern about some of the impacts. '
He said some of the reforms would be supported across the party but 'where there is concerns… those discussions will continue until the vote and beyond.'
Speaking to BBC Newsnight, Mr Pollard said the Government had 'between now and Tuesday to listen to those concerns' and 'to address them' before making the case for reform in the Commons debate next week.
Asked whether the Government would listen to calls for it to change course over planned cuts to Pip, he said: 'I think that's for many colleagues where the real concern is.'
The Daily Telegraph reported that the Prime Minister was prepared to back down on the welfare Bill with Number 10 considering tabling its own amendment to the legislation on Tuesday.
Options being considered include a commitment to speed up payment of support to help people back into work and offering assurances that reviews of policies in this area will be published, according to the paper.
Meanwhile, The Times reported some MPs opposed to the plans had blamed Sir Keir's chief of staff Morgan McSweeney and suggested the time had come for 'regime change' in Downing Street.
Other senior Labour figures outside Parliament, including Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham and London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan, have publicly expressed their opposition to the plans.
Meanwhile, the Tories seem unlikely to lend the Government their support, with leader Kemi Badenoch setting out conditions for doing so including a commitment to rule out tax rises in the autumn budget and further cut the benefits bill.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Parliamentary schedule for Thursday June 26
All timings approximate and subject to business. House of Commons: 0930 Transport questions 1030 Business questions to Commons Leader Lucy Powell 1130 Supply and Appropriation (Main Estimates) (No. 2) Bill: second and third reading General debate on armed forces day An adjournment debate on potential merits of floating solar panels Westminster Hall: 1330 Select committee statement from Joint Committee on human rights 1350 IVF egg donation in young women 1510 Funding of the BBC World Service House of Lords: 1100 Oral questions 1150 Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill – committee stage (day one)
The Guardian
34 minutes ago
- The Guardian
This ruthless pursuit of disabled people has damaged Labour – no matter what happens next
One year ago, as cheering supporters waved union jacks to celebrate Labour's election landslide, Keir Starmer walked into Downing Street with a promise: the country had voted 'for change. For national renewal. And a return of politics to public service.' On Tuesday, his government will ask parliament to remove benefits from more than 1 million disabled and sick people. You will have already heard much about the Westminster drama of the vote. More than 120 Labour MPs have signed an amendment aiming to kill the bill next week, with more still said to be joining, presumably fuelled by the sense this was not the 'change' they were elected for. It has been a welcome relief to see such moral strength, with backbenchers and even a now former government whip dodging alleged threats of deselection to stand up for their constituents. Starmer says he will 'press forward' with the cuts, describing the rebels as 'noises off', but behind the scenes No 10 is said to be desperately trying to get MPs – including frontbenchers – back in line. In the coming days, the papers will inevitably splash on what the size of the rebellion means for Starmer's premiership while pundits gas about rumoured resignations, as though all of this were a game and the only casualty a promising ministerial career. Let's remember, then, what – and who – it is MPs would be voting for. With the number of people relying on disability benefits growing, the government plans to tighten eligibility for personal independence payments (Pip). That means up to 1.2 million disabled people, many of whom are already in some of the poorest households in the country, could lose between £4,200 and £6,300 a year they need to pay for the extra costs of disability. Under the changes, due to be introduced in November 2026, disabled people would not qualify for Pip unless they score a minimum of four points on an assessment designed to measure their ability to carry out a single daily activity, such as washing or getting dressed. If that sounds like technical jargon, just talk to Lee – a worried reader who emailed me – and the human impact of the policy becomes clear. Lee has multiple debilitating health conditions – from muscle wasting and joint pain to depression and daily seizures – and was reassessed for Pip in March. He scraped by to win the lowest benefit rate, but didn't score the magic four points in any category – which means that if MPs vote to change the rules, it is likely Lee will be rejected next time he's assessed. That's despite the fact he needs help from his partner to shower, cook and use the toilet. Lee is 'petrified' of losing his disability benefits and his seizures are increasing from the stress. 'I couldn't survive without the support I receive,' he says. 'It would be a death sentence for me.' No Labour minister will tell you they want to take Pip from people like Lee. No politician who cuts disability benefits ever says out loud, 'We will take support from people who rely on it.' Instead, they cast doubt on reality, chipping away at trust in the social security system and, with it, our disabled neighbours. They say we should give benefits to people who 'genuinely need them', as though not everyone receiving them does. They pick a 'good reason' for cutting support – a bloated welfare bill, say, or a labour market crisis – and paint empathy as costly and cruelty as prudent. That's why government figures – including Starmer himself in response to the rebellion – repeatedly claim the cuts will get disabled people into work, even though a Pip award has no relation to whether someone has a job or not. It is telling that the official forecast for the policy's impact on employment isn't due to be published until October – meaning that MPs are being asked to cut disabled people's benefits on the basis it will help them find work without any evidence to back this up. Or, as Labour MPs tabling the amendment put it: 'We are being asked to vote before consultation with disabled people and before impact assessments.' Facts, it seems, don't trump fiscal rules. Even if a few thousand long-term sick people get jobs as a result of the changes, it will pale in significance compared with the number pushed into penury: analysis by Trussell and WPI Economics shows nearly half a million people in disabled households will be forced into severe hardship if the government goes ahead with the full cuts. 'Tightening eligibility criteria' is a neat euphemism for withholding the money disabled people need to live. The Pip change is only the beginning. In the same bill, MPs are due to vote to cut the health top-up of universal credit for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 in order to, in the government's words, fix a system 'which encourages sickness' – as well as scrap it entirely for under-22s. That's still not all: when the work capabilities assessment is abolished, Pip will become the 'gateway' for this benefit, so swathes of people who lose Pip won't be eligible for out-of-work sickness benefits payments either. Like many, Lee receives both Pip and universal credit – which means Labour's 'reforms' could see his two main strands of support pulled away. On top of that, his partner could also have her carer's allowance taken, as that's linked to Pip eligibility too. Lee has already done the maths. If both his disability benefits are stopped, he will lose precisely £718.87 per month. That works out at roughly half his income. 'I've told the crisis team [these cuts] would be the end of me,' he admits. 'Why would anyone want to go on without any support or quality of life?' That's the thing with Westminster drama. Politics is only a game if you are privileged enough to be cushioned from its effects. For others, it is what decides whether there is enough food in the cupboard or whether a care worker arrives to help you wash your hair. In 2015, fresh from the coalition pact, the Liberal Democrats were punished by the electorate for helping the Conservatives push through sweeping public spending cuts. Come the next general election, the accusation will not be that Starmer's Labour cosied up to the Tories for power, but that they embodied them: their cruelty, their austerity and, ultimately, their failure. In the event the rebel amendment wins or Downing Street is forced to pull the vote to save face, it cannot undo the fact that the government wished to enact these cuts in the first place. If the bill does go ahead, the division lobby will shine a light not simply on the chasms in the Labour party, but on those between compassion and careerism, bravery and betrayal. Forget the MPs who rebel over cutting disabled people's benefits – remember those who don't. This is Labour's poll tax. Its tuition fees. Its Partygate. Just as the Iraq war was for Tony Blair, disability cuts is the moral stain that will mark Starmer's government and the party for years to come. Severely disabled and ill people are going to be starved, isolated and degraded as a result of this policy. No Labour MP who backs it should be forgiven. Frances Ryan is a Guardian columnist
Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Baby boomers to open up even bigger wealth gap over working families
Baby boomer pensioners are set to get even wealthier under Labour as working families struggle, new analysis shows. Pensioners will be £1,500 better off on average over this parliament, research by the Resolution Foundation shows. The boost to pensioners' disposable incomes after inflation and housing costs means they will fare significantly better than other groups. Families with children will see no improvement to their incomes by 2030, in a blow to Sir Keir Starmer's promise to raise living standards across the country. Sir Keir has made delivering higher living standards a key 'milestone' for this parliament, promising in December to raise 'living standards in every part of the United Kingdom so working people have more money in their pocket'. When looking across all households, the Resolution Foundation said disposable income will only rise marginally by 1pc over five years, a cash boost of £300 that the think tank described as 'bleak'. Adam Corlett, from the Resolution Foundation, said: 'There are winners and losers within this weak outlook. Pensioner incomes [are] set to grow by a healthy 5pc over the rest of the decade, while the poorest half of the population are set to see their incomes fall.' The growing disparity between mainly retired baby boomers and younger families will further inflame a tense political debate about generational inequality. Boomers are the wealthiest generation, with the prospects for millennials and Gen-Zs underwhelming by comparison. It follows a period described by the Resolution Foundation as 'bust and boom' for living standards, with years of no pay growth followed by a sudden spurt last year. Mr Corlett said: 'The living standards story of the decade so far has been bust and boom, with Covid-19 and a cost of living crisis followed by a much-needed recovery last year. But the rest of the decade looks bleak.' He added: 'A stronger economy and the right policy interventions can brighten this outlook. Maintaining strong wage growth and returning to pre-pandemic employment levels would make middle-income Britain far better off, while ending the two-child [benefit] limit can lift living standards for poorer families.' The research found people who own their home outright – typically babyboomers – will be far better off in coming years than those still paying down their mortgage. Their incomes are on average set to rise by 3pc by the end of the decade. Mortgaged homeowners will meanwhile see their disposable incomes fall by 1pc, as they feel the slow burn of much higher interest rates than in the recent past. Improving fortunes for pensioners come after the Prime Minister was forced into a humiliating about-turn on winter fuel payment cuts for the elderly. The Resolution Foundation said Sir Keir could improve living standards for more people by ending the two-child benefit cap, a move that would raise average incomes for the poorest half of the country by £200. The number of children in relative poverty is set to hit a record 4.8m on Sir Keir's watch despite pledges to reduce it, the Resolution Foundation said. The think tank called for Sir Keir to fund the axing of the two-child cap by mounting a stealth raid on workers by extending the freeze on tax brackets. A Treasury spokesman said: 'Since July, real wages have grown more than in the entire first decade of the last government, our commitment to economic stability has helped interest rates to fall four times, we have protected working people's payslips from higher taxes, froze fuel duty, increased the national living and minimum wage and in the latest data, and real household disposable income per person is growing at its fastest pace in two years.'
