DWP chief Liz Kendall warned benefit cuts will lead to 'appalling poverty'
The warning came as the Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall prepared to defend the controversial measures at a behind-closed-doors meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party
Lizz Kendall has been told yesterday cuts to disability benefits will lead to "appalling poverty".
The warning came as the Work and Pensions Secretary prepared to defend the controversial measures at a behind-closed-doors meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP).
The Mirror understands Ms Kendall told Labour MPs on Monday evening at the private event the changes were needed to ensure the welfare state "survives". Facing rebellious backbenchers, the Cabinet minister also insisted there will "always be a safety net for those who need it".
Ms Kendall is understood to have said: 'Our plans are rooted in fairness – for those who need support and for taxpayers. They are about ensuring the welfare state survives, so there is always a safety net for those who need it. They're about putting proper safeguards in place to protect the most vulnerable.
'But above all they are about our belief that everyone can fulfil their potential and live their hopes and dreams when – collectively - we provide them with real opportunities and support. This is the better future we seek to build for our constituents and our country.'
But hours before her address the Labour MP Andy McDonald asked ministers in the Commons to provide further evidence "before MPs are asked to vote on imposing such appalling poverty".
Richard Burgon, another Labour MP, added: "Isn't the simple and sad truth that any MP who votes for this upcoming welfare bill is voting to take PIP from disabled people who need assistance to cut up their food, wash themselves and go to the toilet?"
But the disabilities minister Sir Stephen Timms replied: "No. What people will be voting for is reforms to open up opportunities for people who have been denied opportunities for far, far too long. We're putting that right."
Next week MPs are expected to vote on the reforms for the first time. Legislation introduced into Parliament last week includes a tightening of the criteria for Personal Independence Payments (PIP) - a key disability benefit.
Around 800,000 people are set to lose out on the benefit under the Government's proposals. The government's own impact assessment said the overall reforms risk pushing 250,000, including 50,000 children into poverty.
With dozens of MPs warning they will abstain or vote against the measures, No10 is bracing for the biggest revolt Keir Starmer's premiership so far. Last week the Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft quit as a government whip over the plans and there is speculation others may resign ahead of the vote.
In her letter to the PM, Ms Foxcroft said she understood "the need to address the ever-increasing welfare bill" but did not believe the proposed cuts "should be part of the solution".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
11 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Labour MP warns proscribing Palestine Action would be ‘kneejerk reaction'
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has unveiled plans to proscribe the organisation, which armed forces minister Luke Pollard described as 'not a protest group'. Counter-terror police are investigating the break-in last Friday, when activists damaged two RAF Voyager aircraft using paint. Palestine Action claimed responsibility for the incident, and the organisation posted footage from the Oxfordshire base on its X account, claiming that the planes help to 'collect intelligence, refuel fighter jets and transport weapons to commit genocide in Gaza'. Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside Kim Johnson told the Commons that she was 'concerned by the Government's kneejerk reaction to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation'. She told MPs: 'This country has a long history of protests, as I mentioned in this chamber last week, some on British military sites, and none have been branded as terrorists.' Ms Johnson added that authorities could pursue those responsible for 'criminal damage, but not as a terrorist', and asked: 'Can the minister set out what steps his department will take to ensure peaceful protest activity is not wrongly categorised as a national security threat?' Mr Pollard replied: 'The proscription of Palestine Action has been something that has been considered over a long period of time by my colleagues in the Home Office. 'It is a decision that they have taken after considering the facts, those in the public domain and those perhaps held privately, and we are certain that this is the right course of action to keep our country safe in these difficult times.' Liz Saville Roberts, Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader, said: 'Direct action at military bases is nothing new. We remember with respect the women who marched from Wales to Greenham Common, and the thousands of women who joined them. 'They didn't just march, they pulled down fences. They criminally damaged infrastructure. 'So, does the minister recognise the risk implicit in proscribing protest groups calling out war as terrorist organisations?' Ms Saville Roberts was referring to a demonstration between 1981 and 2000, when anti-nuclear weapons protesters set up the Greenham Common Women's Peace Camp. Mr Pollard replied: 'They're not a protest group. They are people that have undertaken severe criminal damage to military assets. They're people who are increasingly using violence as part of their modus operandi. 'The decision that the Home Secretary has taken has not been taken lightly and reflects the seriousness of the intent of that organisation. 'I welcome free speech, I welcome debate and challenge, but vandalising RAF jets is not free speech – that is criminal damage, that is interventions on a military base, that is – as I say in my statement – not only epically stupid but also a threat to our national security and the Home Secretary was right to proscribe them.' In his statement, Mr Pollard had earlier told MPs that personnel at Brize Norton 'work tirelessly to support our armed forces deployed across the world to deliver military assistance to Ukraine, and they have been formally recognised for their contribution in flying humanitarian aid into Gaza, so this action does nothing to further the path to peace'. Sir Julian Lewis, the Conservative MP for New Forest East, warned that 'it would do the country and the Government no favours if they were to lose in court a challenge to the process of proscription, because whereas the secret sabotage of planes would certainly have been an act of terrorism leading to proscription, the fact is, this was a performative act which they announced they had done'. MPs will have a 'full debate' in Parliament as part of the proscription process, Mr Pollard pledged in response, as he said the bid to proscribe Palestine Action was put together after 'considerable thought'. MPs also heard that the 'fence is not formidable' at Brize Norton, after Liberal Democrat MP for Witney Charlie Maynard told the Commons that 'security at the base has been really underinvested for a long time'. Mr Maynard said he had walked around the base's perimeter in his constituency 'quite a few times'. Mr Pollard said the Government's response had already 'helped identify a number of immediate steps' to bolster security at the site. The minister added: 'He is right that much of our armed forces estate and our armed forces have been hollowed out and underfunded for far too long. 'It's precisely for that reason that I welcome the increase in defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by April 2027. 'Our armed forces are brilliant but it's time they had first-class facilities.'
North Wales Chronicle
24 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Ban on political parties taking part in Pride ‘a retrograde step', says minister
Culture minister Sir Chris Bryant said the decision by organisers in five cities was a backwards move as he suggested activists did not give sufficient credit to politicians for law changes in recent decades. He was met with agreement by Conservative shadow culture secretary Stuart Andrew. Sir Chris said Pride is important so young people do not 'internalise hatred and scorn', and hit out at Reform-led councils which have removed Pride flags from display in recent months as he praised the importance of visibility. Organisers of events in Birmingham, Brighton, London, Manchester and Oxford said they had suspended political party involvement in events in 'unequivocal solidarity' with the transgender movement. June is Pride month, with marches and events taking place over the summer. Sir Chris was asked by Dawn Butler, Labour MP for Brent East, whether he regretted the bar by Pride organisers. Ms Butler said: 'Does (he) feel sorry that they've now said that no political parties are allowed to march, because of how the LGBTQI+ community has been treated? I will still be marching, because I normally march with groups, but does he agree with me that this is a sad state of affairs?' Sir Chris said: 'I think we should be absolutely proud of the fact that politics has changed the law in this country and political parties were absolutely essential to that. 'Of course I pay tribute to everybody in my political party who for many, many generations fought for equality. But it's true in the Conservative Party as well where people in many cases had to be even braver than they did in the Labour movement, and of course in many other political parties as well. 'So yes, I think it's an entirely retrograde step to ban people from political parties from taking part in Pride marches.' Mr Andrew said: 'I do want to comment that I find it appalling and deeply disappointing that some Prides across the country have banned our political parties from this year's parades. 'LGBT Conservatives, LGBT Labour, the Lib Dems, not allowed to attend, and like (him), I would also remind the organisers that it was these groups and so many MPs in this House that brought about the changes that we enjoy today. 'And as Jo Cox said, there is more than unites us than divides us. Them causing this divide is a retrograde step.' Former Green Party co-leader Sian Berry (Brighton Pavilion) said she could understand the decision, telling MPs: 'I fully support these decisions being made by the major Pride organisations telling us as political parties we are not welcome this year on their parades or marches. 'Is the minister not as sad as I am about the absolute state of political policy and discourse around trans rights which has directly led to this action?' Sir Chris, who entered the Commons in 2001, said: 'When I was first elected as the member of Parliament here there was still many laws in this country that dramatically and drastically affected the rights of LGBTQ people in this country, and it's because of political parties that we changed the law in this country, and we shouldn't discard the democratic process, it is absolutely essential… to secure our rights.' The fallout from the Supreme Court ruling on the meaning of sex hung over the debate, with the Liberal Democrat MP for North Cornwall, Ben Maguire, calling prominent gender-critical campaigner JK Rowling 'desperate for attention and relevance'. He said: 'As well as politicians, public figures desperate for attention and relevance like JK Rowling and others have poisoned the public discourse with attacks on our trans community, all under the false dichotomy that you cannot be a true feminist and protect women's rights without attacking and abusing the trans community. 'A phoney culture war which has left trans people fearful just to be themselves.' Sir Chris said: 'We reject any attempts to weaponise this ruling to roll back the hard-won dignity and inclusion of trans people. This is not, and must never become, a zero-sum debate. 'We can protect single-sex spaces based on clear lawful criteria whilst also protecting the fundamental rights and dignity of trans people who… are amongst the most marginalised and misunderstood in our society.' Speaking from the despatch box, he said the Government would be bringing forward a trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices within the next nine months. 'These so-called therapies are nothing less than abuse, they do not work, they cause deep-lasting harm and their continued existence is a stain on any society that claims to be inclusive,' he said. MPs later called on shadow equalities minister Mims Davies to 'start challenging' her party's leader Kemi Badenoch on her stance towards LGBT+ people. Tom Gordon, Lib Dem MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, told the Commons that 'leaders of political parties with their words have power' and asked Ms Davies: 'Would she push for her party in particular just to make sure that when it comes to LGBT rights that we consider the humanity that we're talking about and don't whip up hate?' The shadow minister replied that 'we are all leaders in our own ways' and added she was 'proud' the Conservatives 'set the ambitious and absolutely right goal of ending all the new HIV cases by 2030'. Rachel Taylor, Labour MP for North Warwickshire and Bedworth, said the Tories' 'words will sound hollow up and down this country unless they start challenging their leader to do what is right for LGBT people up and down this country', to which Ms Davies replied: 'I think this goes for all parties.'
The Independent
30 minutes ago
- The Independent
Liz Kendall says welfare reforms will create ‘a better future'
Liz Kendall has said the Government's flagship welfare reforms will create the 'better future we seek to build for our constituents and our country', as she faced backbench Labour MPs. The Work and Pensions Secretary's appearance at a Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) meeting on Monday night came after warnings from Labour backbenchers in the Commons that the reforms will lead to 'appalling poverty'. Under the proposals, ministers will limit eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limit the sickness-related element of universal credit (UC). Ms Kendall's appearance at the committee was her first since the Government published its welfare reform Bill, and since Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft resigned as a Government whip because of her concerns over the package. Ms Kendall told the meeting there is 'no route to social justice based on greater benefit spending alone'. Ministers have previously said the reforms could save up to £5 billion a year. But in a sign they are now emphasising a moral case for the Bill over its financial savings, Ms Kendall told MPs: 'The path to a fairer society – one where everyone thrives, where people who can work get the support they need, and where we protect those who cannot – that is the path we seek to build with our reforms. 'Our plans are rooted in fairness – for those who need support and for taxpayers. 'They are about ensuring the welfare state survives, so there is always a safety net for those who need it. They're about putting proper safeguards in place to protect the most vulnerable. 'But above all they are about our belief that everyone can fulfil their potential and live their hopes and dreams when, collectively, we provide them with real opportunities and support. This is the better future we seek to build for our constituents and our country.' More than 20 MPs asked Ms Kendall questions about the reforms during the PLP meeting, the PA news agency understands, with most being broadly supportive, but a small minority insisting they would vote against the plans in the Commons. MPs leaving the meeting told journalists there was far more consensus about the reforms than it outwardly appeared. But in the Commons before the gathering, Labour MPs continued to voice their concerns. Richard Burgon, Leeds East MP, said: 'Isn't the simple and sad truth that any MP who votes for this upcoming welfare Bill is voting to take Pip from disabled people who need assistance to cut up their food, wash themselves and go to the toilet?' Work and Pensions minister Sir Stephen Timms replied: 'No. What people will be voting for is reforms to open up opportunities for people who have been denied opportunities for far, far too long. We're putting that right.' Andy McDonald, MP for Middlesbrough and Thornaby East, said: 'Ministers have highlighted the scale of Pip recipients expected to lose payments make up one in 10 of the total Pip caseload, suggesting the impact of the cuts will be limited, but that's still 370,000 current recipients expected to lose on average £4,500. 'But these numbers rest on a set of assumptions that the OBR (Office for Budget Responsibility) has described as highly uncertain. DWP (Department for Work and Pensions) data shows there are 1.3 million people currently receiving Pip daily living payments who would not meet the new criteria. 'So before MPs are asked to vote on imposing such appalling poverty, will the DWP or the OBR provide further evidence underpinning these claims?' Sir Stephen replied: 'Well, the OBR has published its assessment. (Mr McDonald) is absolutely right, their assessment is that one in 10 of those who are receiving Pip in November next year will have lost it by 2029/30. 'Following that, we will be able to introduce the biggest investment there has ever been in employment support for people out of work on health and disability grounds, because we don't want any longer to track people on low income for years and years and years, we want people to be able to enter work and fulfil their ambitions, and that's what the investment will allow.' The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill will be debated on July 1, when it receives its second reading in the Commons. Pip is a benefit aimed at helping with extra living costs if someone has a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition. Data for Pip claimants begins in January 2019, when the number was 2.05 million. An impact assessment published alongside the Bill confirmed previously published estimates that changes to Pip entitlement rules could see about 800,000 people lose out, with an average loss of £4,500 per year.
