Keir Starmer doubles down on DWP PIP cuts as major Labour revolt looms
Most of the savings to the welfare bill will be made by restricting access to a key disability benefit - Personal Independence Payments (PIP) - in a move that has caused alarm
Keir Starmer has stood by controversial welfare cuts despite facing the biggest revolt of his premiership so far.
The Prime Minister insisted "we have got to get the reforms through" as he sidestepped questions over whether there would be any concessions on the plans.
It comes as Mr Starmer braces for a massive revolt when Labour MPs are asked to vote on proposals aimed at slashing £5billion from welfare.
Most of the savings will be made by restricting access to a key disability benefit - Personal Independence Payments (PIP) - in a move that has caused alarm among charities and campaigners.
The government's own internal assessment said the reforms could result in an extra 250,000 people, including 50,000 children, falling into poverty.
READ MORE: Disability cut impact could be even worse than expected warns food bank charity
Legislation implementing the changes is expected to be introduced in the Commons this week - before MPs are asked to vote on the changes.
Well over 100 Labour MPs have called for a delay or suggested they will rebel.
Asked whether he was confident he had the numbers to get the reforms through Parliament, Mr Starmer told reporters: "We've got to reform the welfare system.
"Everybody agrees with that proposition. So we've got to do that basic reform. It doesn't work for those that need support and help into work and it doesn't work for the taxpayer.
"So it's got to be reformed. The principles remain the same, those who can work should work.
"Those who need support in to work should have that support in to work which I don't think they are getting at the moment.
"Those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected. And that includes not being reassessed and reassessed.
"So they are the principles, we need to do reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the bill comes."
Pressed on whether there would be any more concessions to win over rebellious Labour MPs, Mr Starmer added: "Well we have got to get the reforms through and I have been clear about that from start to finish.
"The system is not working, it's not working for those that need support, it's not working for taxpayers."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
41 minutes ago
- Reuters
Nvidia's pitch for sovereign AI resonates with EU leaders
PARIS, June 16 (Reuters) - Nvidia (NVDA.O), opens new tab CEO Jensen Huang has been pitching the idea of "sovereign AI" since 2023. Europe is now starting to listen and act. The concept is based on the idea that the language, knowledge, history and culture of each region are different, and every nation needs to develop and own its AI. Last week, the CEO of the artificial-intelligence chipmaker toured Europe's major capitals - London, Paris and Berlin - announcing a slew of projects and partnerships, while highlighting the lack of AI infrastructure in the region. In a place where leaders are increasingly wary of the continent's dependency on a handful of U.S. tech companies and after drawing ire from the U.S. President Donald Trump, his vision has started to gain traction. "We are going to invest billions in here ... but Europe needs to move into AI quickly," Huang said on Wednesday in Paris. On Monday of last week, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced 1 billion pounds ($1.35 billion) in funding to scale up computing power in a global race "to be an AI maker and not an AI taker." French President Emmanuel Macron called building AI infrastructure "our fight for sovereignty" at VivaTech, one of the largest global tech conferences. After Nvidia laid out plans to build an AI cloud platform in Germany with Deutsche Telekom ( opens new tab, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called for the digital sovereignty and economic future of Europe's top economy. Europe lags behind both the U.S. and China as its cloud infrastructure is mostly run by Microsoft (MSFT.O), opens new tab, Amazon (AMZN.O), opens new tab and Alphabet's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab Google, and it has only a few smaller AI companies such as Mistral to rival the U.S. ones. "There's no reason why Europe shouldn't have tech champions," said 31-year-old Mistral CEO Arthur Mensch, sitting beside Huang, who has led Nvidia for more than three decades, at a panel at VivaTech. "This is a gigantic dream." In France, Mistral has partnered with Nvidia to build a data centre to power the AI needs of European companies with a homegrown alternative. It will use 18,000 of the latest Nvidia AI chips in the first phase, with plans to expand across multiple sites in 2026. In February, the European Union announced plans to build four "AI gigafactories" at a cost of $20 billion to lower dependence on U.S. firms. The European Commission has been in touch with Huang and he had told the EU executive that he was going to allocate some chip production to Europe for these factories, an EU official told Reuters. Nvidia's chips known as Graphics Processing Units or GPUs are crucial for building AI data centres from the U.S. to Japan and India to the Middle East. In Europe, a push for sovereign AI could reshape the tech landscape with domestic cloud providers, AI startups, and chipmakers standing to gain from new government funding and a shift toward in-region data infrastructure. Nvidia also wants to cement demand for its AI chips, ensuring that even as countries seek independence, they still rely on its technology to get there. The push is not without challenges. High electricity costs and rising demand could strain sourcing of electricity for data centres. Data centres account for 3% of EU electricity demand, but their consumption is expected to increase rapidly this decade due to AI. Mistral, which has raised just over $1 billion, is trying to become a European homegrown champion with a fraction of the money U.S. hyperscalers or large data-centre operators spend in a month. "Hyperscalers are spending $10 billion to $15 billion per quarter in their infrastructure. Who in Europe can afford that exactly?" said Pascal Brier, chief innovation officer at Capgemini ( opens new tab, a partner of both Nvidia and Mistral. "It doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything, but we have to be cognizant about the fact that there will always be a gap." Mistral has launched several AI models which are used by businesses but companies tend to mix them with models from other companies such as OpenAI, Anthropic and Meta Platforms (META.O), opens new tab. "Most of the time it's not Mistral or the rest, it's Mistral and the rest," Brier said. ($1 = 0.7393 pound)
Telegraph
44 minutes ago
- Telegraph
British manufacturers snub US after Trump's trade war
The US has dropped out of the three most desirable markets for British manufacturers for the first time in decades, as Donald Trump's trade war dents confidence in the world's biggest economy. UK industrial leaders now prefer the EU, Asia and the Middle East as their top three 'growth' markets globally, according to trade body Make UK – relegating the Trump's America to fourth spot. It is the first time since Make UK began the survey in 1988 that the US has not been the second most attractive market for British manufacturers. The EU has consistently been ranked in first place. The drop in enthusiasm underlines the extend to which Mr Trump's ongoing trade war has affected how companies now view America as a place to do business. Despite Mr Trump's push to bring more manufacturing jobs to America, just 4pc of companies polled by Make UK – which represents 20,000 businesses – said they would consider setting up a US manufacturing facility. Seamus Nevin, Make UK's chief economist, said: 'There has clearly been an immediate and striking shock to the system as far as the special trading relationship with the US is concerned for manufacturers. 'It remains to be seen whether this is a one off drop in sentiment while trading relations enjoy a reset or, whether this is the first sign of a permanent fracture in relations with manufacturers' biggest market.' The drop in enthusiasm comes despite Sir Keir Starmer having agreed a trade deal with the US last month. The deal, which is yet to come into force, was hailed by the Government as a 'landmark agreement' that would save thousands of jobs and make it easier for British firms to do business across the Atlantic. However, Mr Nevin said: 'Even when the trade deal comes into force, UK goods will now be more expensive and moving forward companies may just decide that it's now easier to turn their gaze towards markets elsewhere where there are fewer barriers to doing business.' UK exports to US fall by £2bn It comes after official data last week showed that UK exports to the US fell by £2bn in April – their largest decline on record. Almost two thirds of companies surveyed separately by Make UK said they expected their US export volumes to drop amid the trade war, while a similar amount said they expected a negative hit to their business more broadly. Almost a third said they were thinking about changing their supply chains and sourcing arrangements. The US president has pitched his tariff blitz as a painful but necessary step to lower America's reliance on overseas imports and encourage inward investment. However, sentiment among US manufacturers has soured too, dropping to its lowest level since the pandemic – according to the US's National Association of Manufacturers. This is despite the repeated promises by Mr Trump that his policies will boost the domestic industry. Make UK also warned of worsening prospects for British manufacturers at home after growth forecasts for the sector were slashed from 1pc to -0.5pc for 2026. As well as the impact of Mr Trump's trade war, companies are facing increased employment costs after Rachel Reeves increased employers' National Insurance (NI) contributions in her October budget, which took effect in April. Mr Nevin added: 'While at first glance the headline numbers may not look too bad, manufacturers are facing a gathering storm of huge uncertainty in one of their major markets, a skills crisis and eye watering energy costs which are providing a harsh reality for many.' In a separate survey released on Monday, a poll showed foreign investors had become significantly less enthusiastic about investing in Britain. The number of investors planning to invest in Britain dropped from 62pc in March to 52pc in May, a separate survey by auditor Ernst & Young found. However, 54pc said they expect the UK's attractiveness to increase in the next three years, in a sign that Donald Trump's policies are encouraging investors to look beyond the US for opportunities.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Is it any wonder that the UK is such an unequal society?
Do our imperial masters still consider our country to be part of the British Empire and try to consolidate that status by handing out a few baubles in the hope of keeping the masses happy? No wonder the UK is such an unequal society, led by a Prime Minister who also happens to be a benighted knight of the realm. Dennis Canavan, Bannockburn. Inexcusable indifference I refer to Doug Maughan's letter of June 13, 'Hypocrisy and double standards taint the West's view of Israel'. I suggest that Benjamin Netanyahu believes that as long as he has Donald Trump guarding his back, he has nothing to fear from the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Trump administration has already imposed sanctions on four judges at the ICC over the tribunal's investigation into Israel's alleged war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank. While the five countries (thankfully including the UK) who are imposing sanctions on two Israeli far-right ministers are members of the ICC, neither Israel nor the US is. Both are countries which believe they are above international law, outwith the bounds of common decency. Mr Maughan's letter ought to be recognised as a call not only to our 'leaders' but to each one of us. We must resist 'the temptation to shrug and look away'. Indifference, silence, on our part to such suffering as the Palestinians are experiencing is inexcusable and makes us allies of Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers. John Milne, Uddingston. * Doug Maughan may also be interested to know that it has been reported that former Labour MP Lord Austin has been sent by the government to Israel 'as a trade envoy to maintain our relationship with Israeli businesses.' Money is also regularly raised by the sale of Israeli government bonds on the London market. Israeli banks involved in the West Bank are also active in London. I'm sure that the Prime Minister, being an ex-lawyer, will be able to explain to this confused member of the public why Israel's activities in Gaza and the West Bank are much less serious than those of Russia in Ukraine and the former South African government, both sanctioned. Ewan Henderson, Haddington. Let's sanction this warfare state History repeats itself with false claims about what a perceived enemy is about to do. On February 3, 2003, British journalists were handed a dossier purporting to show Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ready to be used within days in an attack on the UK. Tony Blair went on television later that month saying Iraq had 'vast quantities of... anthrax, VX nerve agent, and mustard gas' and we had to strike. On June 14, 2025 Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said that Iran could have produced a nuclear weapon in a very short time' while a henchman averred that 'Iran had enough fission material for 15 nuclear bombs within days'. Yet weeks earlier Tulsi Gabbard, the US National Intelligence Director, stated to Congress that the US 'continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon' and that its leader 'has not authorised a nuclear weapons programme that he suspended in 2003'. Over the past year Israel has mercilessly bombed Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now Iran, killing thousands and causing chaos and carnage. It is a warfare state. With a population of 10 million it has over 600 warplanes, not far short of the total strength of the RAF. It is led by an extreme right-wing cabal untrusted by 70% of the Israeli people, according to opinion polls. It's time for the UK to place sanctions on this dangerous regime and stop supplying arms, intelligence and material to it. William Loneskie, Lauder, Berwickshire. Spineless attitude towards Iran My, how times change. Under our current Labour party leadership Britain has given away the Chagos Isles, handed the EU a say in the future of Gibraltar and now produces no response to the Iranian threat to our shores if we aid Israel. Where is the spine of the British government? When given a choice of supporting Iran or Israel in the current situation there should be no hesitation yet there is and Labour has been very critical of only Israel. Israel has targeted precise locations for missiles whilst Iran has just fired them off indiscriminately. Where is the harsh criticism of Iran, where the press can only report stories favourable to the regime? Does Labour think the world will really be safer if Iran has a nuclear bomb? Right now that seems to be its position, ably backed up in Scotland by the theoretically anti-nuclear SNP and the Greens. Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow. Nuclear power and renewables Can anyone explain to me how hydro power and nuclear power are equivalent in how they supply electricity to the grid? ('Should Scotland blindly follow England down the nuclear power path?', Rebecca McQuillan, June 12). My understanding is that the amount of energy produced by a nuclear plant is pretty much fixed. It can not easily be modulated to increase or reduce output and the only change comes when it is being serviced (a planned break) or when there is a fault (an unplanned break). Whereas the hydro power system that Rebecca talks about has a reservoir into which water can be pumped at times of excess electricity. Then, at times of high demand for electricity, water can be released from the reservoir to generate power. The hydro power/reservoir system works like a battery that can be switched on and off at times of high or low demand. So nuclear power and the hydro/reservoir system perform fundamentally differently. If we have nuclear power, we need an additional system to deal with the ups and downs of electricity demand and to deal with the times when the nuclear power station closes down, which can happen unexpectedly. This flexible source of energy could be provided by a battery type system (such as the hydro power/reservoir system) or a generator that can be powered up and down easily (such as a gas-fired power station) or a cable from Norway or somewhere. Nuclear power does nothing to offset the ups and downs of renewables. J. Pountain, Glasgow. A fair system of Legal Aid One has to hope that our nation is sufficiently civilised as to enable those of otherwise insufficient means to obtain access to legal representation in our courts ('Scots court chaos looms as solicitors boycott scheme', June 10). At the same time, that seems unlikely to happen when you consider the competing claims on public finances, such as the NHS, the putative care service, dilapidated schools, housing crisis, national defence, winter fuel payments, the two-child benefit cap, ferries and other causes that are more likely than legal aid to appeal to the electorate. Even if the current campaign were to achieve a realistic settlement, for how long would that last? Clearly the government has no long-term will to support an effective legal aid system. I would therefore like to ask the solicitors' profession where lies the constitutional duty to provide public access to justice, whether with the government as the national executive or with the judicial arm of the nation's constitution. Certainly, the government is signed up to international treaties to provide access to justice but that appears to have cut little ice in the last 40 years since the state took over control of the legal aid system from the solicitors' profession. The whole raison d'etre of that profession and of the constitutional monopoly it enjoys in professional legal representation, is that it has a responsibility to the whole nation, whether or not the government provides sufficient financial support. A solicitor's duty to an immediate client may therefore require to be balanced with the responsibility of the profession to the public as a whole. Consideration therefore might need to be given to a system which operates in other jurisdictions. whereby the solicitors' profession provides legal representation for the impecunious, financed equitably across the profession out of fees paid by the financially more fortunate clients of that profession. This would be somewhat along the lines of the legal representation that was made available via the Poor Roll, prior to the formal institution of the legal aid system which has now fallen into substantial disrepair. Michael Sheridan, Scotstoun, Glasgow.
