Labour minister apologies for comparing disability benefit cuts to children's pocket money
A Labour minister has apologised for comparing disability benefit cuts to children's pocket money.
Darren Jones, chief secretary to the Treasury, attempted to defend Labour's welfare cuts, announced by chancellor Rachel Reeves in the spring statement on Wednesday (26 March).
He told BBC Politics Live: 'My understanding is what the impact assessment doesn't account for is the benefit that you get from our additional money into support for training, skills or work.
'Take, for example, if I said to my kids, 'I'm going to cut your pocket money by £10 per week, but you have to go and get a Saturday job'.
'The impact assessment on that basis would say that my kids were down £10, irrespective of how much money they get from their Saturday job.'
Appearing on ITV's Peston show on Wednesday evening, Mr Jones admitted his earlier comment was 'tactless'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
20 minutes ago
- The Independent
Who will benefit from the Winter Fuel Payment U-turn
The government has expanded eligibility for the winter fuel payment, now including pensioners with incomes at or below £35,000. Previously, only those receiving pension credit were eligible, but now two-thirds of pensioners will receive the £200-300 payment. The Treasury stated the new threshold balances support for lower-income pensioners with fairness to taxpayers. This change is estimated to cost taxpayers £1.25bn in England and Wales, saving £450m compared to universal availability. The payment will be made automatically this winter, with those above the £35,000 threshold having the payment recovered via HMRC or the option to opt out.
Telegraph
32 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Nervous families freeze spending in blow to growth hopes
Nervous families are freezing spending in a blow to hopes that the UK economy will continue its growth spurt. Retail sales rose by just 1pc in the year to May, according to new figures from the British Retail Consortium (BRC). The study, which suggests households are cutting back, will pile fresh pressure on Rachel Reeves amid concerns that the economy's surprisingly strong momentum in the first three months of 2025 is evaporating. The beleaguered Chancellor will likely be forced to find tens of billions of pounds more in the autumn to repair her fiscal headroom if her hopes of a growth miracle fall short. It raises the prospect of further tax rises. Helen Dickinson, chief executive of the BRC, said families were already cutting back on non-essentials amid growing nervousness. She added: 'Consumers put the brakes on spending, with the slowest growth in 2025 so far. This was due largely to declines in non-food sales, as fashion and full price big-ticket items were held back by lower consumer confidence.' Figures from Barclays separately showed card spending grew well below inflation at 1pc in the year to May, down from 4.5pc in April. Sarah Bradbury, from the Institute of Grocery Distribution, said confidence improved slightly in May but remained 'fragile' beneath the surface, adding: 'Shoppers are still navigating financial uncertainty and continue to rely on money-saving tactics like planning ahead and buying on promotion. 'While the mood has brightened, we've yet to see this translate into meaningful changes in behaviour.' Hiring slump It comes as Donald Trump's trade war and Britain's deteriorating job market spark uncertainty for households. Hiring confidence has fallen at the fastest rate since the height of Covid in summer 2020, according to ManpowerGroup UK. Figures from the recruiter revealed that employer confidence has plunged by 12 points to a net score of 19 since the start of the year. It is now at the lowest level since early 2023. In several large industries such as communications, energy and the public sector, more employers are now looking to reduce rather than increase their workforce for the first time since the pandemic. The share of bosses blaming headcount changes on economic challenges almost doubled from the start of the year, to 64pc from 36pc. Petra Tagg, at ManpowerGroup UK, said: 'Hitting this new low is a symptom of the entire labour market re-aligning after the changes imposed by the National Insurance and living wage increases, alongside the recent uncertainties of the US trade tariffs. 'From here, employers will 'wait and see' to gauge the volume of the reset rather than making any swift decisions towards the end of the year.' Meanwhile, BDO said there was a risk of companies 'being paralysed by fear' and stagnating if they put off hiring and investment decisions. The consultancy surveyed 500 C-suite executives at global businesses with more than $100m (£74m) in revenue. Some 84pc described global risks as more defined by crisis than ever.
Scotsman
33 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Why Scotland's public sector needs its own version of DOGE and we should all support it
Getty Images Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... For those of us who have taken the trouble to engage with Reform UK's personnel and their activities – so we might understand their concerns, ambitions and the motives behind them – the performance of Britain's disruptor party at last Thursday's Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election did not come as a surprise. Labour's victory was a shock because the SNP – and John Swinney in particular – had itself promoted the narrative of a Labour collapse as part of its campaigning tactics. To make this outcome appear especially credible the Labour Party itself had clearly switched into damage limitation mode by protecting its candidate from himself. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In the end the vote delivered a tight three-way contest with only 1471 votes between the Labour, SNP and Reform candidates. With the Conservative candidate coming fourth with 1621 votes, never again should Rusell Findlay suggest voting Reform will result in an SNP victory. That sort of unjustified entitlement will be the death of Conservative or other pro-UK parties when Reform is clearly a serious contender. Let voters decide for themselves on the true merits of a candidate rather than be shepherded to vote against competitors. The prospect now lies ahead that the SNP may not form an administration after next year's Holyrood election and the possibility of genuine change might be possible. Accepting we have a proportional voting system at Holyrood I am not in favour of parties trying to build coalitions before they have been elected because it reduces choice for voters. Let the electorate decide which parties it wishes to reward for good reasons after which the elected representatives can take it from there. I am, however, in favour of parties giving serious consideration to policies that accentuate the common ground they might have with each other so that when attempting to build an administration, be it a full-blooded coalition or a confidence and supply arrangement, it is achieved in a positive and practical manner that makes good government possible. One of the issues that Scotland has to face up to is that it has its spending priorities all wrong. There are very serious faults with the quality and supply of many of our public services and the lack of funds finding their way to where they can make the most difference cannot be solved by taxing or borrowing more. Both of these possibilities are already stretched to the limit – so it requires changing the priorities. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ideas about how this might be done are again up for debate thanks to the election of President Javier Milei of Argentina and President Trump gaining a second term after the Biden hiatus. Both have taken a radical approach of asking hard questions about the justification of spending and making sweeping changes that involve not just trimming budgets but closing down some operations that are now considered to be unnecessary or provide duplication. This has been characterised by Trump's creation of a Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE for short. Now in England, where Reform UK has gained control of five County Councils, local doge projects are being established. In Derbyshire decisions are being taken in quick order to start by example by closing down committees and removing generous sinecures that provide allowances and expenses to councillors. The amounts are initially relatively small but they signal an intent to the public that councillors feathering their nests by establishing talking shops and generating paperchases must end. This can only make the acceptance of rationalising departments and making superfluous posts redundant easier to deliver. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad But a word of warning. Making changes at the margins is not going to be enough. Simply cutting back on the number of administrators is not the solution to bad resource allocation. What is required is to accept some functions are not the business of the state, be they delivered by unaccountable quangos and agencies, local councils or legislative governments. Abandoning functions that are not seen as vital necessities will be required. Scotland undoubtedly needs its own form of DOGE to go through the lush spending of the Scottish Parliament – all while the homeless are without shelter, drug-dependents are without rehab, classrooms are without teachers, pregnant women are without maternity wards and convicted criminals are released because we are without enough prisons. The place to begin is to take more seriously the insightful reports of the Auditor General who reveals with disturbing regularity the poor decisions that have been taken which cost us millions. When we add millions together we get closer to saving billions – all of which can be used to reduce Scotland's taxes to at least the same level as England's so we can encourage the enterprise that will create genuine sustainable prosperity. By stripping the SNP's unnecessary spending vital services can be protected and improved. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It also needs a huge change in attitude – and it must start at the top. We need a Scottish Government to always think about the public pound when committing to defend its policies through the courts. The fact that defending the Scottish Government case in the Supreme Court regarding what constitutes a woman should have run up a bill of £170,000 should be universally condemned. The legal costs that started with Nicola Sturgeon and passed through the hands of Humza Yousaf and John Swinney should be paid by them. It was, after all, an action designed to save their political reputations and against at least half of Scotland's people. Likewise, any spending on the whole panoply of independence and grievance mongering or political hobbyhorses should be open to challenge. The turnaround of the Argentinian economy has led the once-defaulting basket-case economy to higher GDP growth, falling inflation and improving and a declining poverty rate. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Scotland has a great deal to do to correct 18 years of SNP misrule all the more reason that being more realistic about what can be afforded must be as starting point.
