Scottish government minister says UK welfare reforms should be abandoned
Shirley-Anne Somerville was commenting after the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill passed its first legislative hurdle at Westminster.
Ahead of the crunch vote, Sir Keir Starmer ditched a mainstay of his welfare reform agenda as he battled to get the draft laws through the House of Commons.
In a major concession as MPs prepared to vote, the Prime Minister shelved plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), with any changes now only coming after a review of the benefit.
Under Scotland's devolved social security system, Pip is currently being replaced by the Adult Disability Payment.
Reacting to events at Westminster, Ms Somerville reiterated the Scottish Government's pledge not to cut that benefit.
'Despite the panicked, last-minute concessions they have made, if the UK Government presses ahead with cuts to disability support they will plunge more people into poverty,' said the SNP MSP.
'That is unconscionable.
'Their approach also risks creating a deeply unfair two-tier system, pushing the impact of cuts onto future applicants for disability benefits.
'The UK Government needs to stop balancing the books on the backs of some of the most vulnerable people in society.
'They need to properly listen to the overwhelming criticism their proposals have generated and do the right thing by disabled people by abandoning this bill entirely.
'I want to reassure disabled people in Scotland, that the Scottish Government will not cut Scotland's Adult Disability Payment, we will not let disabled people down as the UK Government has done.'
The decision to remove the Pip changes from the Bill was announced just 90 minutes before MPs voted.
The legislation passed by 335 votes to 260, majority 75.
Despite the late concession, there were 49 Labour rebels, the largest revolt so far of Sir Keir's premiership.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Inquiry hears of older people ‘cull' as Matt Hancock defends care home policies
Care home deaths felt like a 'cull of older people who could no longer contribute to the society', the UK Covid-19 inquiry has heard as Matt Hancock defended his handling of an 'impossible' situation. There were tense exchanges as the former health secretary returned to give evidence to the wide-ranging probe, this time focused on the adult social care sector. Mr Hancock, who resigned from government in 2021 after admitting to breaking social distancing guidance by having an affair with a colleague, responded to an accusation he had 'blatantly lied about the situation with care homes'. At a Downing Street press conference on May 15 2020, Mr Hancock said: 'Right from the start, we've tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes.' Bereaved families have previously called the phrase a 'sickening lie' and a 'joke'. The inquiry has heard there were more than 43,000 deaths involving the virus in care homes across the UK between March 2020 and July 2022, and a civil servant was quoted earlier this week describing the toll as a 'generational slaughter within care homes'. On Wednesday, remarks were read to the inquiry from an anonymous witness, who accused Mr Hancock of not being heartfelt or having a proper understanding of the situation care homes were in during the pandemic. Counsel to the inquiry Jacqueline Carey KC, who gave no further information on the person's identity or their role, said: 'One person in particular said 'He (Mr Hancock) blatantly lied about the situation with care homes, there was no blanket of protection. We were left to sail our own ships. He wasn't heartfelt. He had no understanding or appreciation of the challenges care homes face, pandemic or not, it felt like we were the sacrifice, a cull of older people who could no longer contribute to the society'.' Mr Hancock said he felt it was 'not helpful' for the inquiry to 'exchange brickbats' – a term used to describe a verbal attack. He added: 'I've been through everything that we did as a department, a big team effort, and we were all pulling as hard as we possibly could to save lives – that's what I meant by saying that we tried to throw a protective ring around. 'Of course, it wasn't perfect. It was impossible – it was an unprecedented pandemic, and the context was exceptionally difficult. 'What I care about is the substance of what we did, the protections that we put in place, and most importantly, what we can do in the future to ensure that the options available are better than they were last time.' He said the emphasis was on ''tried' – it was not possible to protect as much as I would have wanted'. He added that he and others were 'trying to do everything that we possibly could' in 'bleak circumstances' at a time when 'I also had (former government adviser) Dominic Cummings and a load of people causing all sorts of problems for me, and I had Covid'. Elsewhere in his evidence, Mr Hancock – who said one of his own relatives died in a care home but did not give further details – acknowledged the policy around discharging patients from hospital into care homes early in the pandemic was an 'incredibly contentious issue'. When the pandemic hit in early 2020, hospital patients were rapidly discharged into care homes in a bid to free up beds and prevent the NHS from becoming overwhelmed. However, there was no policy in place requiring patients to be tested before admission, or for asymptomatic patients to isolate, until mid-April. This was despite growing awareness of the risks of people without Covid-19 symptoms being able to spread the virus. The High Court ruled in 2022 that government policies on discharging hospital patients into care homes at the start of the pandemic were 'unlawful'. While the judges said it was necessary to discharge patients 'to preserve the capacity of the NHS', they found it was 'irrational' for the Government not to have advised that asymptomatic patients should isolate from existing residents for 14 days after admission. Asked about the policy, Mr Hancock said there were no good options, adding: 'It's the least-worst decision that could have been taken at the time.' Pressed further, he said he had both agreed with and defended the decision at the time. He added that 'nobody has yet provided me with an alternative that was available at the time that would have saved more lives.' He said while the policy had been a government decision, it had been 'driven' by then-NHS chief executive Sir Simon Stevens, now Lord Stevens. The inquiry heard Mr Hancock said in his witness statement that NHS England had 'insisted' on the policy, and while he did not take the decision himself, he took responsibility for it as then-health secretary. Asked about March 17 2020 when NHS bosses were instructed to begin the discharge process, Mr Hancock said officials were 'pushing very hard' to get more PPE (personal protective equipment) into care homes. He said not advising care homes to isolate returning residents without symptoms was a 'mistake', but it was in line with clinical guidance at the time. In 2023, appearing for a separate module of the inquiry, Mr Hancock admitted the so-called protective ring he said had been put around care homes early in the pandemic was not an unbroken one, and said he understood the strength of feeling people have on the issue. Mr Hancock's statement, referred to during Wednesday's hearing, said while there had been 'widespread concern' that patients being discharged from hospital were the main source of infection in care homes, 'we learned in the summer of 2020 that staff movement between care homes was the main source of transmission'. He told the inquiry he had wanted to bring in a ban on staff movement between care homes but that being unable to secure funding from the Treasury to compensate affected workers was a 'killer blocker' so it did not happen. Nicola Brook, a solicitor representing more than 7,000 families from Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK (CBFFJ), said Mr Hancock's claim that the discharge policy had been the least-worst decision available was 'an insult to the memory of each and every person who died'. The CBFFJ group has written to inquiry chairwoman Baroness Heather Hallett, to express their concern at some 'key decision-makers' not expected to be called in this module, including former prime minister Boris Johnson and Lord Stevens. Outlining the state of the adult social care sector at the outbreak of the pandemic, Mr Hancock said it 'was badly in need of, and remains badly in need of, reform', but rejected the suggestion of it being a 'Cinderella service to the NHS'. He said pandemic contingency plans, prepared by local authorities for adult social care, had been 'as good as useless' at the time, and described a 'hodge podge of accountability' between local councils and government departments. He claimed the situation has 'got worse not better' for care homes in the event of another pandemic hitting, and suggested a series of recommendations, including having isolation facilities in care homes and ensuring a stockpile of personal protective equipment (PPE). Hearings for module six of the inquiry, focused on the effect the pandemic had on both the publicly and privately funded adult social care sector across the UK, are expected to run until the end of July.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Starmer pledges to review minimum barrier heights in multi-storey car parks
Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to review the safety of multi-storey car parks, following the death of a 15-year-old boy in Liverpool. Gabriel Santer died after falling from the top of a multi-storey car park in the city centre in October 2020. The Prime Minister said he wanted to 'prevent future tragedies', and the Government will conduct a call for evidence on minimum barrier heights in car parks. This came after Labour MP Peter Dowd urged Sir Keir to back his calls to increase the minimum required height of guarding. Mr Dowd's Multi-Storey Car Parks (Safety) Bill also proposes 24-hour staffing of such car parks, to improve safety. During Prime Minister's Questions, Mr Dowd, MP for Bootle said: 'Gabe Santer, a 15-year-old, fell to his death from a multi-storey car park in Liverpool in 2020. He's one of the many dying in such tragic circumstances, including in my constituency. 'My Multi-Storey Car Parks (Safety) Bill seeks to prevent such deaths. 'Will the Government look carefully at its content as part of a national suicide prevention strategy?' The Prime Minister replied: 'The answer is yes, we will look at the content of it, and I'm grateful to him for raising it.' He added: 'Across the House, we have all got tragic experience of suicide, and our thoughts are with Gabe's family and with his friends. 'We will conduct a call for evidence on part K of the building regulations about minimum guarding heights, so that necessary protections are in place to prevent future tragedies. We will also look at the contents of the Bill.' Defence minister Maria Eagle previously presented 'Gabe's Law' to Parliament in 2023, in a bid to reform the safety of car parks.
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No 10 says Starmer backs Reeves after Chancellor's tears in Commons
Rachel Reeves is 'going nowhere' and will remain as Chancellor, Downing Street said, despite Sir Keir Starmer declining to give her a public show of support. The Chancellor was visibly tearful in the Commons, as her position came under intense scrutiny after the welfare U-turn which put an almost £5 billion black hole in her plans. But allies said she was dealing with a 'personal matter' and No 10 said she had Sir Keir's 'full backing'. Sir Keir, who stumbled on his way out of Downing Street for Prime Minister's Questions, faced questions over his handling of a welfare reform package which has been stripped of key elements to limit the scale of a Labour revolt. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said Ms Reeves looked 'absolutely miserable' and challenged the Prime Minister to say whether she would keep her job until the next election. Sir Keir dodged the question about whether Ms Reeves would be in place for the remainder of the Parliament, saying Mrs Badenoch 'certainly won't'. Changes to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) were abandoned on Tuesday just 90 minutes before MPs voted on them, wiping out the savings that Ms Reeves had counted on to help meet her goal of funding day-to-day spending through tax receipts rather than borrowing. Mrs Badenoch said: 'Today the Prime Minister refused to back his Chancellor, leaving her humiliated. 'She is the human shield for his expensive U-turns. How can anyone be a chancellor for a man who doesn't know what he believes and who changes his mind every other minute?' As the Chancellor left the Commons after Prime Minister's Questions her sister, Ellie Reeves, took her hand in an apparent show of support. Asked about her tears, a spokesman for the Chancellor said: 'It's a personal matter which, as you would expect, we are not going to get into. 'The Chancellor will be working out of Downing Street this afternoon.' Reports suggested Ms Reeves had been involved in an altercation with Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle shortly before Prime Minister's Questions. A spokeswoman for the Speaker said: 'No comment.' Asked why Sir Keir did not confirm in the Commons that he still had faith in Ms Reeves, the Prime Minister's press secretary told reporters: 'He has done so repeatedly. Govt was planning to save ~£5bn in 2029-30 through welfare cuts – would have risen to ~£11bn in long run Now, govt will save nothing this parliament (2029-30 savings from cutting health element of UC (£1.7bn) roughly offsets cost of raising basic UC (£1.8bn)) — Helen Miller (@HelenMiller_IFS) July 2, 2025 'The Chancellor is going nowhere. She has the Prime Minister's full backing. 'He has said it plenty of times, he doesn't need to repeat it every time the Leader of the Opposition speculates about Labour politicians.' Asked whether the Prime Minister still had confidence in Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, the press secretary said: 'Yes.' Labour has promised that income tax, employee national insurance contributions and VAT will not be increased, restricting Ms Reeves' options for raising money if she does look to hike taxes. The Institute for Fiscal Studies' incoming director, Helen Miller, said: 'Since departmental spending plans are now effectively locked in, and the Government has already had to row back on planned cuts to pensioner benefits and working-age benefits, tax rises would look increasingly likely. 'This will doubtless intensify the speculation over the summer about which taxes may rise and by how much.' Sir Keir declined to rule out tax rises later this year, telling MPs: 'No prime minister or chancellor ever stands at the despatch box and writes budgets in the future.'
