How your MP voted in Starmer's welfare reforms
The bill passed its second reading by 335 ayes to 260 noes, a majority of 75, with 49 Labour MPs voting against the welfare cuts which have caused controversy.
Disability minister Sir Stephen Timms announced a last-ditch concession that plans to restrict eligibility for personal independence payments (PIP) – which had been the central pillar of the government's reforms – would not take place until after a review of the benefit had concluded.
The government had initially planned to change the eligibility criteria for disability benefits for all new claimants from November 2026 but now the new system will not come into force until the review has concluded.
It comes just days after the government watered down the legislation for the first time on Thursday, excluding all existing claimants from changes to PIP in a chaotic U-turn.
Sir Keir's welfare bill has continuously caused controversy as a growing rebel camp, led at the time by Dame Meg Hillier, putting forward an initial amendment which forced the government to U-turn from its initial plans. While she voted to back the legislation, almost 50 Labour MPs expressed their discontent with the bill still.
One key voice in the 'noes' was MP Ms Maria Tidball, born with a congenital disability affecting all four limbs, who broke down in tears as she delivered an impassioned speech criticising the welfare cuts.
Another key rebel, Rachel Maskell, said disabled people will have been worried watching the debate.
The MP for York Central said: 'I'm obviously really sad that the Bill went through but I think my greatest sadness is that disabled people will have been looking on and seeing Parliament debating their futures, and I think they'll be incredibly distressed when they see the way that Parliament was today.
'That's the thing that tugs at me, because I think ultimately we've got huge responsibility to disabled people and they weren't served well by the department today.'
Sir Stephen Timms later said, in response to concerns over a two tier system, that it was 'completely normal in social security.'
'PIP replaced DLA (disability living allowance) in 2013 but half a million adults are still on DLA today. That doesn't cause problems. Parallel running is normal, and actually it's often the fairest way to make a major change.'
Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall said welfare reform was particularly 'difficult' for Labour because the party cared 'passionately' about the subject.
Asked what the main lessons were from the backbench rebellion over proposed cuts, she told broadcasters: 'Welfare reform is always really difficult, perhaps especially for Labour governments.
'It's something we care passionately about.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
38 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Disability claims 'set to soar by more than a million' before the next election after Labour's U-turn... as Tories warn it could lead to the collapse of the entire benefit system
The number of people claiming disability benefits is set to jump by more than a million before the next election following Labour 's welfare climb-down. An official forecast published alongside the Government's benefits bill reveals that ministers believe the number of claims will soar by 40 per cent in the next four years. It suggests the rise could even lead to the collapse of the benefits system, warning there is a real 'risk the welfare state won't be there for people who need it in future' unless spending is brought under control. The warning came as Kemi Badenoch called for a major clampdown on welfare spending. Sir Keir Starmer was forced to abandon plans to trim the benefits bill by £5billion last week following a revolt by Labour MPs. Proposals to tighten the eligibility criteria for Personal Independence Payment (PIP) will no longer take place. But the forecast suggests that without reform, the number of PIP claimants will jump from 3million to 4.2million by 2029. The cost of PIP payments is predicted to rise from £21.8billion to £34.1billion, while the overall bill for sickness and disability benefits will top £100billion. Tory work and pensions spokesman Helen Whately said: 'The shocking cost of Labour's screeching U-turn on welfare is once again on full display. 'The Government's own impact assessment says that without any action the cost of PIP to the public finances will reach over £34billion by the end of this decade – and now, after Keir Starmer's total surrender to his own party, this increase is baked in.' Yesterday Mrs Badenoch said recent events showed that Labour was 'not serious' about tackling the bloated benefits bill. The Tory leader called for an immediate return to face-to-face assessments for new PIP claims, reversing the online system. And she said that 'low level' mental health issues such as anxiety should not be automatically treated as 'severe conditions' which qualify people for sickness benefits. Mrs Badenoch will use a speech this week to float the idea of halting disability benefits for foreign nationals. Figures show that claims by households with at least one foreign national are running at nearly £1billion a month. Rebel Labour MPs are now plotting to force further concessions this week by removing plans to cut £2billion from Universal Credit (UC) payments. Disabled people and their supporters gather outside the Houses of Parliament for a protest against cuts to welfare benefits as MPs debate and vote today on the government's Welfare Reform Bill at its second reading in London, United Kingdom on July 01, 2025 Richard Burgon said planned changes to UC's health element payment would result in 750,000 vulnerable people losing £3,000 a year. He said: 'We should not balance the books on the backs of sick and disabled people.' Chancellor Rachel Reeves hinted last week that the welfare U-turn would force her to hike taxes again in the autumn, saying there would be 'a cost'. This weekend Sir Keir said it was still 'important we review the system', pointing to a review of PIP which is being led by welfare minister Sir Stephen Timms. But Sir Stephen has said the review will be 'co-produced' with disability campaigners, who bitterly opposed the Government's efforts to cut the benefits bill.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
The spirit of the G8 ‘make poverty history' summit of 2005 seems long gone
Twenty years ago this weekend, the leaders of the world's most powerful countries, chaired by Tony Blair, gathered at the Scottish golf resort of Gleneagles and made a series of historic promises on debt relief and overseas aid. It was the culmination of a long-running campaign involving charities, churches and celebrities and benefited from the passionate commitment of Gordon Brown, for whom international development is a lifelong cause. A few days before, more than 200,000 campaigners had gathered in Edinburgh and formed a noisy, joyful human chain, demanding that the world's leaders 'make poverty history'. As a result of the momentum created and the promises made, international aid increasedand 36 countries eventually had their crippling overseas debts drastically reduced. There are many reasons it would be hard to envisage a Gleneagles summit today. The certainties of the early noughties, when globalisation felt like an unstoppable force underpinning economic growth and restraining inflation, are long gone. Just three and a half years after Gleneagles, Brown, by then prime minister, was hosting a meeting of the G20 in London's Docklands, at which global leaders scrambled to respond to the havoc wreaked by the global financial crash. Old certainties were cast aside, relationships strained and the claim to leadership of the G8 industrialised countries was hopelessly undermined by the fact that the crisis originated on their doorstep. The resulting deep recessions in many wealthy countries raised questions about voters' commitment to global causes. In the UK, public support for development, once solid enough to encourage David Cameron to embrace the target of spending 0.7% of national income on aid, started to fall away from about 2012-13. More recently, the world has become a much more fragmented, multipolar place. Middle-income countries such as China and India have demanded more prominence on the global stage. Russia's territorial aggression in Ukraine prompted its expulsion from the G8 – now the G7 – and killed off any lingering hopes that free trade and capitalism would ultimately usher in liberal democracy. Global solidarity was hard to summon, then, even before Donald Trump's second term unleashed chaos in the global trading system. The budgets of many rich-country governments have taken a battering from repeated economic shocks, at the same time as pressure mounts for more defence spending to confront potential threats. Labour ministers are quite right when they say 'the world has changed'. Yet despite the more fraught global backdrop, the campaigners who worked alongside Blair and Brown at Gleneagles and beyond have been profoundly shocked by the British government's casual disregard of development. Three years ago, Keir Starmer was promising to undo Boris Johnson's 'misguided' decision to absorb the Department for International Development back into the Foreign Office. Labour's manifesto dropped this idea. It suggested the UK had 'lost influence' as a result of the Tories' neglect of international development and promised to 'turn the page to rebuild Britain's reputation', restoring aid to 0.7% 'as soon as fiscal circumstances allow'. Instead, Labour slashed the aid budget, with little discussion, when Starmer wanted to promise Trump he would raise defence spending on his White House trip in February. Jenny Chapman, the development minister who replaced Anneliese Dodds when she resigned in protest at this deep budget cut, has insisted the UK still wants to lead on development. Yet it is hard to take the moral high ground while admitting that no area of policy, including projects to support women and girls' health and education, will be safe from the cuts. Labour has said it wants to create respectful partnerships with developing countries; but Save the Children UK's director, Moazzam Malik, told me recently that the cuts would be felt by many countries not as a new-found era of collaboration but as a withdrawal. As the UK steps back at the same time as Trump is dismantling USAID, the challenges in some of the world's poorest countries have only intensified. In particular, a blizzard of recent expert reports has called for action on the unsustainable debts squeezing many governments' budgets. The UN-backed Financing for Development conference in Seville last week ended with promises of reform, including the wider use of 'pause clauses' to halt repayments during natural disasters, for example – something the UK has supported. More radical solutions that might have included debt write-offs did not make it through the negotiations, but South Africa hopes to use its chairmanship of the G20 to press for more progress in the coming months. Michael Jacobs, a former Brown adviser, now a visiting professor at the Overseas Development Institute, insists there was a sense of momentum on debt relief in Seville. 'It was the single most significant topic of debate. There is rising pressure on the creditor countries – including China – to act. So, as in 2005, the moment for a new international debt relief package may be arriving,' he said. Other campaigners returned from Seville notably downbeat, however, pointing to the difficulties of assembling a global coalition of the willing on development in a time of tight budgets and fraying international bonds. Summoning the spirit of Gleneagles may be too much to hope for, two decades on. But after a string of economic shocks and as the climate emergency accelerates, the moral imperative to act remains – even if this Labour government can't find it in a focus group or on a spreadsheet.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Boris Johnson fails to understand his role in the rise of Reform UK
SIR – Boris Johnson argues that his former colleagues in the Conservative Party should ignore Nigel Farage and Reform UK (report, July 5). Mr Johnson appears to be unaware that the rise of Reform is almost entirely his fault. He squandered a massive parliamentary majority by ignoring the wishes of the Conservative electorate: opening our borders to mass low-skilled migration; allowing damaging wokery to subvert women's rights; pursuing economically illiterate net zero policies; and failing to keep reasonable control of the behaviour of his Downing Street staff during Covid. In its growing support for Reform, the public is signalling that it has had enough of tone-deaf politicians who wilfully ignore the wishes of voters and break promises in their manifestos. The fact that Mr Johnson is unable to see this only confirms the diagnosis. Will Curtis Raydon, Suffolk SIR – Boris Johnson has failed to grasp the most rudimentary principle of politics, which is that the first duty of any government is to secure the borders. Nigel Farage and his party take this obligation seriously, while Mr Johnson, along with other Tory prime ministers in recent years, singularly failed in this crucial area, with disastrous consequences. Will Forrow Dawlish , Devonshire SIR – It's a bit rich for Boris Johnson to tell us to ignore Nigel Farage. Mr Johnson's 'green industrial revolution' included the banning of sales of new petrol and diesel vehicles from 2030, a massive expansion in the number of wind turbines, and unrealistic targets to cut emissions. His green obsession has left us with the most expensive energy of all the developed nations, deindustrialisation, and impoverishment of the UK population. N H Bailey Stockport, Cheshire SIR – Boris Johnson appears ignorant of the thousands of voters who have switched to Reform UK because of Tory arrogance and incompetence. One hopes that Kemi Badenoch has a proper grasp of recent Conservative failings, and will ignore both him and those who, incredibly, believe that bringing Mr Johnson back to repeat past mistakes might somehow lead to a different outcome next time. Stephen Kemp Leicester SIR – For the first time ever, I agree with Boris Johnson. Nigel Farage is a serial political failure, rejected by voters on many occasions. As a member of the European parliament, he failed to support British farmers and fishermen. Like his hero Donald Trump, Mr Farage lives for publicity, making ridiculous promises and fooling the gullible. Without constant attention, he would fade away. A Lloyd Liverpool
