Starmer defends his record in power as biggest revolt of his premiership looms
The Prime Minister insisted at a meeting of senior ministers that his team could look back with a 'real sense of pride and achievement' as the July 5 anniversary of his first year in office nears.
The Government's work has focused on giving working people a 'chance to thrive, not just survive', a Downing Street spokesman said, as Labour backbenchers continue to threaten a rebellion over welfare reforms they insist will have a negative impact on disabled people.
The welfare reform Bill will have its first airing in the Commons on Tuesday, and some Labour backbenchers continue to say they will vote to halt the legislation, after a much larger rebellion was quelled by ministers last week.
Cabinet ministers, and even the Prime Minister himself, are said to be involved in efforts to persuade Labour MPs not to join the rebellion.
Sir Keir opened the Cabinet meeting on Tuesday morning by telling senior ministers the welfare reforms are 'designed to help those who can work into employment and ensure dignity and security for those who can't work', a No 10 spokesman said.
'He then reflected on the last year in office, saying we could all rightly look back with a real sense of pride and achievement,' the spokesman added.
No 10 pointed to the three trade deals struck with India, the US, and the EU, the extra investment in the spending review, and a cut in NHS waiting lists among the Government's achievements one year on.
The spokesman added: 'He said the Government's work is all designed and focused on improving the lives of working people and giving them the chance to thrive, not just survive, and the Government should be proud of those achievements as a team.'
Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds had earlier urged Labour MPs to back the reforms package, and warned that retreating entirely from them would mean losing the chance to 'make any changes for the better whatsoever' and undermining 'public support'.
'I'd ask (colleagues) to support the Government on that basis, because clearly what we've got here is something which is better than the existing system,' Mr Reynolds told Sky News on Tuesday morning.
Ministers hope a partial U-turn on the benefit cuts, which will protect existing claimants of personal independence payments (Pip) and the health element of universal credit, are enough to win over Labour rebels.
Ahead of the Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill's second reading in the Commons on Tuesday evening, 39 Labour backbenchers have signed an amendment aimed at halting its progress.
Leading rebel Rachael Maskell has warned 'many more' have told her they still plan to vote against the Government's plans than those who have signed up.
The York Central MP said she had no fear in voting down the Bill and felt a 'moral duty' to 'speak up for' disabled people.
Asked whether MPs would lose the whip for voting against the Government, Mr Reynolds said he was 'not aware of anything like that' but 'those issues are for the chief whip'.
To see off the threat of far greater rebellion, the Government last week softened the impact of its changes to protect some 370,000 existing Pip claimants who had been set to lose out following reassessment.
Some 126 Labour MPs had signed that previous 'reasoned amendment' proposed by Treasury Committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier, which would have stopped the legislation if approved.
Ministers also committed to a review of the system, involving disabled people and led by disabilities minister Sir Stephen Timms, and unfreezing the higher UC rate for those already claiming the health-related element.
But critics have argued the concessions risk creating a 'three-tier' system of disparity between existing and new claimants, as well as any future changes that emerge as a result of the Timms review.
Facing questions from broadcasters on Tuesday morning, Mr Reynolds insisted it was 'entirely normal' for existing entitlements to be 'grandfathered' during major changes to the welfare system.
Downing Street would not guarantee Sir Stephen's review would be completed by the time its planned reforms are implemented.
No 10 was also insistent that Government modelling, which predicts its welfare proposals will push 150,000 more people into poverty by 2030, was 'subject to uncertainty'.
The Downing Street spokesman said the prediction did not take into account the additional £1 billion a year the Government is investing in helping get people with disabilities and long-term health conditions into work or support with the cost of living.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
24 minutes ago
- The Sun
Arsenal ‘close to Viktor Gyokeres transfer with Gunners in advanced talks with Sporting after ruling out Benjamin Sesko'
ARSENAL are in advanced talks to sign Viktor Gyokeres after honing in on the Swede over their other target Benjamin Sesko, according to reports. The Gunners have been weighing up their options for a new centre-forward and it would appear they are now focusing on Gyokeres. 3 3 According to Belgian journalist Sacha Tavolieri, Arsenal feel like they are "touching the final line" when it comes to agreeing a deal for the Sporting Lisbon star. While it's also claimed they have already agreed a five-year contract with Gyokeres himself. Gyokeres has found himself trying to force a move away from Sporting this summer after claims that a gentleman's agreement to leave for a cut-price fee between him and the club has not been honoured. Sporting president Federico Varandas has claimed the club are happy to let Gyokeres leave for less than his release clause, but will stand firm when it comes to getting a fair price for the Portuguese league's top scorer. Citing the prices paid for some other players this summer, Varandas told O Jogo: "Sporting does not need to sell him, but we remain sensitive to the dreams of Viktor and any of our athletes. "After weeks of meetings, we are not asking for the release clause and will be reasonable regarding the price we ask for Viktor. Today, I believe there is a strong probability he will leave. 'We have been watching the market and I saw [Martin] Zubimendi, who is six months younger than Viktor, leave for €65million. "I saw Matheus Cunha and Bryan Mbeumo, both forwards but who, in my opinion, do not have Viktor's market value or quality, being negotiated for around €75million. "Given the demands we consider fair, I believe Viktor could leave – unless he has the worst agent in the world, which is hard for me to believe, because he is one of the best footballers in the world." Adding: "I'm not going to say what the price is, the player knows what it is. Arsenal Plot Big Double Transfer For Eberechi Eze and Hugo Ekitike! | Transfers Exposed "I can tell you that Viktor won't leave for €60million plus €10million he won't, he just won't." Meanwhile Fabrizio Romano has claimed that the club's stance has left Gyokeres feeling "betrayed and tired". It's been claimed that Gyokeres has informed Sporting that he won't be returning to the club and has no intention of playing for them again. Gyokeres scored 39 goals in 33 league appearances last season, more than any other player in Europe's top 10 leagues. Arsenal have also been linked with a move for Sesko, but advancements in the Gyokeres deal would likely spell an end to those talks. The Gunners today announced the arrival of Kepa Arrizabalaga from Chelsea on a £5m deal, with the Spanish goalkeeper set to play backup to first choice shot-stopper David Raya next season. While deals for Brentford 's Christian Norgaard and Real Sociedad's Martin Zubimendi are also thought to be on verge of completion. 3
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EUAN McCOLM: Harsh reality has failed to penetrate Swinney's armour, but it's time he reconnected with reality over gender turmoil
Anas Sarwar's U-turn on self-ID for trans people was humiliating but entirely necessary. Having whipped his MSPs to support the SNP Government's crackpot plan to dismantle women's rights and allow anyone to enter the single-sex spaces of their choosing, the Scottish Labour leader later came to his senses. Interviewed on the Holyrood Sources podcast in February, Mr Sarwar said that, had he known at the time of the gender reform vote in December 2022 what he later learned, he would not have backed a change in the law. The Labour's boss's volte face coincided with public outcry over the case of nurse Sandie Peggie, who was subjected to a disciplinary procedure by NHS Fife after she complained that she should not have to share a changing room with trans-identifying doctor, Beth Upton. After two weeks of tribunal hearings in February, Ms Peggie's claims of discrimination and harassment against the health board and Dr Upton will resume on July 16. Former Conservative Scottish Secretary, Alister Jack, has already saved MSPs from themselves on the issue of self-ID. In 2023, he blocked reform of the Gender Recognition Act in Scotland on the grounds that such a change in the law would negatively impact with the UK-wide Equality Act of 2010. But First Minister John Swinney remains solidly convinced that the failed law - which would have destroyed women's sex-based rights - was wise. Appearing last week on the Holyrood Sources podcast, Mr Swinney was asked about Mr Sarwar's U-turn. Would the First Minister have supported reform of the Gender Recognition Act in 2022 if he'd known what he does now? Harsh reality cannot penetrate the First Minister's armour. 'Yes, I would,' said Mr Swinney. And then he used a line favoured by weasels who reject the idea that allowing men to identify as women might bring with it come complications. The First Minister told the podcast that he was 'trying to improve the lives of a very small number of people in our society who I think have an incredibly hard time.' Gender activists have long focused on the relatively small number of trans-identifying individuals as if this fact makes their ideology any less dangerous. The fact is the demands of these activists impacts everyone, particularly women. Take women's sport, for example. The entry into a women's race or boxing tournament of a biological male disadvantages every female participant. Likewise, every time someone born male is permitted to take a woman's place on a protected short-list or to enter a single-sex space such as a changing room or a domestic violence shelter, others pay a heavy price. But the pernicious effect of gender ideology is felt far beyond 'flashpoints' such as arguments over single-sex spaces. In fact, it has seeped into every aspect of modern life. Organisations across the public and private sectors have ignored their legal responsibilities in order to permit self-ID, despite the law being quite clear that, when it comes so single-sex safe spaces, biology trumps all else. The publication, today, of a new report into the impact of gender ideology on the world of academia shows just how deeply the 'trans women are women' mantra of gender activists has penetrated universities across the country. Professor Alice Sullivan of University College London was commissioned by the UK Government to examine the effect of gender ideology on academic freedom. Her findings make for deeply disturbing reading. Professor Sullivan's report - 'Barriers to research on sex and gender' - was commissioned by the UK Government's Department for Science, Innovation and Technology. The academic found that the last decade has seen the emergence of a culture of hostility towards anyone who shares so-called 'gender critical' views. Across 17 categories, including 'self-censorship' and 'bullying, harassment and ostracism', Professor Sullivan found academics had been silenced on issues of sex and gender. John Swinney may be able to content himself that to acquiesce to the demands of trans activists is to do no more than offer assistance to a few vulnerable people, but Professor Sullivan's report shatters that idea. In the course of her research, the academic - who previously published a report exposing the damage caused by inaccurate recording of sex by UK institutions - found that vital scientific research, including studies on the effects of medical interventions like puberty blockers, and data collection on sex - has been undermined by universities' failure to address coordinated campaigns to silence academics deemed guilty of such wrong-think as 'a woman is an adult human female.' Professor Sullivan says her research raises 'stark concerns' and highlights cases where researchers investigating vital issues have been subjected to sustained campaigns of intimidation simply for acknowledging the biological and social importance of sex. Among the many academics interviewed by Professor Sullivan was Sarah Pedersen, Professor of Communication and Media at Robert Gordon University, who was targeted by activists after expressing the perfect rational view that biological sex is real. Professor Pedersen says the 'cancellation' of high-profile gender-critical academics has damaged the entire higher education sector. 'My personal experiences of disruption, no-platforming and personal attacks,' she adds, 'have impacted not just my academic career but also my work for third-sector organisations, who were warned away from working with me, meaning they could no longer benefit from my expertise.' Professor Sullivan has made a list of 20 recommendations to the UK Government and to academic institution which she hopes will defend research and protect individual academics from both professional and personal attacks. These include such simple steps as agreeing to prioritise the search from truth over adherence to political agendas and enabling 'genuine' academic debate. The Scottish Government should pay attention. In a fortnight, Sandie Peggie's tribunal will recommence in Dundee. The devastating impact of gender ideology on the lives of ordinary people will, once again, dominate the news agenda. John Swinney is a fool if he thinks voters still buy the line that reforming gender laws will impact a tiny proportion of the population. Ms Peggie's case shows clearly the harms done to women by the removal of long-established boundaries. In workplaces across the country, the demands of trans activists have made the lives of women miserable. Those same campaigners have been allowed to destroy the careers of dedicated academic and wreck important research, all in the name of making life easier for 'a very small number of people.' It's time for John Swinney to reconnect with reality and stop pandering to activists whose demands do nothing but harm.
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The British political class have shown themselves at their worst
The result should never have been in doubt. That whips and ministers were nervous at all should be testament enough as to how badly this government is being run. The welfare reform Bill was finally passed with a majority of 75, about 100 less than Labour's notional majority. But there is something missing from ministers' and MPs' reactions to this 'victory': the cheers, such as they were, sounded forced. The smiles were wan. The congratulations looked half-hearted. Because this is a Bill whose passage means many losers and zero winners – a rare achievement in parliamentary politics. Of course, the real losers are those future claimants of Personal Independence Payments (PIP) who, depending on the detail of the latest concessions granted by Keir Starmer, will find it much more difficult to have their claims approved. But there are many more political losers. There are the rebels themselves, at least some of whom might have hoped for personal advancement in their political careers and who must now face years of being nominated for the crummiest, dullest standing committees – the traditional punishment for those who won't take their whips' advice. Then there are the Conservatives, who voted against a measure many of them clearly supported. There was even a shadow cabinet meeting last week at which Kemi Badenoch asked each member how the party should vote. That such a question even needs to be asked suggests there was at least some support for a more principled, less cynical stance. Then of course there is the Government, which, before this debate and vote, was in a slightly stronger, slightly more popular position than this evening and which now has achieved the passing of a measure that even ministers can no longer see the point of. It has spent a lot of its political credibility in securing a Bill that was originally sold as a genuinely reformist measure (it is not) and which would save the Treasury billions (it will not). Not the Commons' finest moment. A damaged legislature, a damaged government and, most importantly, a damaged prime minister. Happy anniversary, Sir Keir.
