
DWP benefits U-turn leaves £4.8 billion hole in the budget
But they also removed a key plank of Sir Keir Starmer's welfare reform agenda, delaying changes to Pip until after a review of the benefit not due to conclude until autumn 2026.
Many disability charities were unhappy with the result," despite some concessions.
James Watson-O'Neill, Chief Executive of the national disability charity Sense, said: "Today's vote in Parliament is deeply distressing. By choosing to advance this bill, MPs have voted for measures the government's data say will push 150,000 disabled people into poverty. This is not the right way to reform our welfare system — it's a move that has already caused significant fear and anxiety within the disabled people's community.
"We're incredibly grateful to all those who spoke out against the bill. Their efforts helped secure important government concessions, which mean some disabled people will retain the support they rely on. However, this creates a deeply unfair two-tier system — protecting some while leaving new claimants facing serious financial hardship. And the government's latest concession, to delay the tightening of the criteria for PIP, doesn't change the fact that it will eventually become harder for new claimants to access this vital benefit.
"Looking ahead, we urge the government to immediately reconsider their proposal to remove the health element of Universal Credit from young people until they turn 22. We also want to work constructively with them to expand the eligibility criteria for additional support for those who will never be able to work, to ensure no one is left behind."
PIP IS NOT AN OUT-OF-WORK
BENEFIT
PIP is an allowance that helps disabled people with the extra costs incurred by having a disability. You can claim it whether you work or not.
The media and government narrative about PIP is incorrect and must be challenged
KILL THE BILL!… pic.twitter.com/oOulXW1CWm
But Mark Rowland, Chief Executive of the Mental Health Foundation, shared these concerns: 'Tonight's concessions by the UK government are a victory for not just the millions of people across the country who are disabled, but for every single one of us who may find ourselves disabled one day. Removing Clause 5 is clearly the right decision given the lack of evidence these measures would encourage anyone with a mental health problem to return to work, and the very clear risk of pushing people into poverty, worsening their mental health. Despite this, this bill remains deeply flawed.
'We remain concerned by the measures in this bill which both reduce the amount paid to recipients of the health element of Universal Credit, and limits its eligibility to those over the age of 22. These measures are discriminatory, and will do little to support people back into the workplace. The UK government should drop the implementation of these measures too."
Ahead of a crucial vote on cuts to disability benefits, our new evidence casts doubt on whether jobs are even available for disabled people facing cuts 📢
The analysis found that the parts of the country among the hardest hit by the cuts have fewer job opportunities 1/3 pic.twitter.com/4XAgKq3OoL
With no clarity on when the changes will be enacted or what they might entail, the Chancellor now faces a fiscal headache as a forecast £4.8 billion in welfare savings have been whittled away to nothing.
Economists at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and Resolution Foundation think tanks warned that Tuesday's concessions meant Ms Reeves could now expect no 'net savings' by 2029/30 – a key year for meeting her fiscal targets.
IFS deputy director Helen Miller said the move had effectively halved the Chancellor's 'margin of error' against her main fiscal rule, once again raising the possibility of tax rises in the autumn.
On top of that, a stuttering economy and global instability could mean she has even less room for manoeuvre than expected.
I am going into the Commons Chamber to speak against & vote against the Government's appalling Bill to cut disability benefits. I urge all Labour MPs to do so. I was elected to protect disabled people not harm them. pic.twitter.com/Qc1TA0e90n
Ms 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.'
The Resolution Foundation's Ruth Curtice agreed that there would be no savings in 2029/30, but suggested changes to universal credit – almost the only part of the Government's proposals still standing – could save money in the longer term.
On Wednesday morning, the Conservatives accused Labour of making billions in unfunded spending commitments, including both the U-turns on welfare and the partial reinstatement of winter fuel payments.
In a letter to Ms Reeves, shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride demanded to know where the money was coming from, asking: 'Will you raise tax or increase borrowing?'
Ministers have repeatedly insisted that Labour will not raise taxes on 'working people', specifically income tax, national insurance or VAT.
Recommended reading:
But Ms Reeves also remains committed to her 'iron clad' fiscal rules, which require day-to-day spending to be covered by revenues – not borrowing – in 2029/30.
Meanwhile, Sir Keir himself will face a grilling from MPs on Wednesday as he attempts to repair relations with his backbenchers.
The weekly session of Prime Minister's Questions comes just a day after 49 of his own MPs voted against his welfare reforms – the biggest rebellion of his premiership so far – while several backbenchers described the Government's handling of the issue as 'chaotic' and 'a shambles'.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
12 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Primary school pupils in white working-class regions ‘among worst performing'
Primary school pupils in white working-class regions are among the worst performing in the country, a report has suggested. The Institute for Government (IfG) think tank said disadvantaged white pupils in England have 'particularly poor educational outcomes' compared to their peers. In a report published on Wednesday, it found that councils in the bottom fifth for performance of disadvantaged pupils were 'disproportionately likely' to have large shares of pupils from white working-class backgrounds. Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, last week sounded the alarm over the 'national disgrace' of under-performance among the demographic. She warned that 'far too many' white working-class children were failing to get the exam results they needed to move on in life and risked being 'written off' by society. Pupils across England, Wales and Northern Ireland will receive their GCSE results on Thursday, a week after A-level results were handed out. This year's cohort were mostly aged 11 when schools were first closed during the Covid pandemic. The IfG report analysed pupil performance at Key Stage 2 – when children are around the same age, in their final year of primary school. It claimed that educational inequalities across England have 'grown wider and more pronounced' since the pandemic, with only 10 local authorities recording the same or better attainment levels last year than before the first Covid lockdown. Disparities have grown especially among the poorest children, in part because they were less likely to have access to laptops or quiet office spaces during the pandemic, the think tank said. It meant fewer than half of disadvantaged pupils – or around 46 per cent – met the expected standards in reading, writing and maths for Year Six last year. The results were particularly stark among regions with high rates of white working-class children, with only 41 per cent meeting the required standards for 11-year-olds last year. It included areas such as Knowsley and Blackpool, while almost all of the top performing regions in Key Stage 2 attainment were in London. Along with pupils from mixed white or black Caribbean backgrounds, white working-class children were the only pupils with attainment rates lower than the national average last year, the IfG said. By contrast, close to half of disadvantaged children from mixed backgrounds met that benchmark, with the figure rising to nearly 60 per cent for both disadvantaged black pupils and disadvantaged Asian pupils. The IfG cited previous research by the Commons education committee, which suggested that white British children's performance may be particularly vulnerable to disadvantage. It said this was because they were more clustered in rural or coastal areas with 'lower funding ... higher teacher vacancies, longer travel times and worse digital infrastructure'. The think tank suggested tackling high absence rates would help to improve performance among disadvantaged pupils. The Telegraph revealed last week that the Government was preparing a series of interventions to address low attainment measures among certain demographics in a white paper to be unveiled in the autumn. Measures being considered by ministers include plans to expand an AI-powered attendance tool, showing schools how they fare against those with similar demographic make-ups. The Department for Education currently publishes data showing school absence levels among minority ethnic groups, but is understood to be alarmed at figures for white working-class pupils.


Daily Mail
12 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Sir Keir Starmer urges sanctions on Putin over meeting with Zelensky
Sir Keir Starmer yesterday led calls to force Vladimir Putin to the negotiating table after Europe's unprecedented White House diplomacy put the ball back in the Russian dictator's court. The Prime Minister suggested possible sanctions for Putin after co-chairing a virtual Coalition of the Willing meeting, debriefing their day trip to Washington DC and planning for the future. US President Donald Trump also warned of a 'rough situation' if Moscow does not make peace as he pushed for Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky to meet Putin in Switzerland in the next two weeks. A Downing Street spokesman said last night: 'The leaders discussed how further pressure – including through sanctions – could be placed on Putin until he showed he was ready to take serious action to end his illegal invasion.' German chancellor Friedrich Merz laid down the gauntlet to the Kremlin over any potential talks, saying: 'We don't know whether the Russian president will have the courage to attend such a summit.' Hinting at more sanctions as Russia again barraged Ukrainian cities with 270 drones and ten missiles in an overnight attack, he added: 'Therefore, persuasion is needed.' It followed Monday's extraordinary meeting in Washington where Mr Zelensky and the US President were joined by Sir Keir, chancellor Merz and the leaders of France, Italy, Finland, the EU and Nato. Sir Keir hailed a 'breakthrough' after the unprecedented gathering garnered a US commitment to military involvement in security guarantees for Ukraine. Mr Zelensky hopes to have such a proposal in writing within the next ten days to strengthen his hand before heading to any meeting with Putin to discuss territory. The US administration's unorthodox, realpolitik negotiations offer the most significant hope of bringing peace to Europe since Russia's invasion in February 2022. But there remains real fear in Ukraine that they could be sold out as the White House seems loath to pressure Moscow with sanctions and military might, instead turning the screws diplomatically on Kyiv. Ukrainian journalist Peter Zalmayev told the Daily Mail: 'The message that Ukraine and Europe need to get through to Trump is that his getting the Nobel Peace Prize depends not on whether he ends the war in Ukraine, but on how he ends it.' Mr Trump broke off Monday's talks to call Putin and update him on progress, during which the two superpowers agreed to set up a bilateral meeting between the Russian tyrant and Mr Zelensky. The President was typically bullish afterwards, saying the two adversaries are 'getting along a little bit better than I thought' despite 'tremendous bad blood'. He told Fox News that 'otherwise I wouldn't have set up the [bilateral] meeting, I would've set up a three – a trilat'. But he cautioned: 'We're going to find out about president Putin in the next couple of weeks... It's possible he doesn't want to make a deal.' He added: 'I hope president Putin is going to be good and if he's not, then it's going to be a rough situation. And I hope that Zelensky will do what he has to do. He has to show some flexibility also. The thing is a mess.' Yesterday, the Kremlin appeared to be dragging its heels over the plan, which would see a meeting with Mr Trump follow the one-on-one between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders. Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov told Russian state TV: 'Without respect for Russia's security... without full respect for the rights of Russians and Russian-speaking people who live in Ukraine, there can be no talk of any long-term agreements.' Further muddying the waters, a source in Mr Trump's administration claimed it was Putin who suggested a meeting without the US President. During their call, Putin told Mr Trump: 'You don't have to come – I want to see him one on one,' Politico reported. It was also claimed Putin suggested they meet in Moscow – a clear non-starter for Kyiv, with Geneva one possible venue. The Swiss confirmed that if Putin was visiting for peace talks, the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant for the dictator would not be acted upon.


Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Brutal cost-of-living warning that will impact every Australian: 'The system is broken'
Deliveries from popular online retailers like Mecca, ASOS, and The Iconic are set to become more expensive and slower if the Federal Government backs a new fuel tax. Proposals expected to be discussed at the Economic Reform Roundtable on Wednesday and Thursday could result in retailers passing on higher fuel costs directly to customers, potentially making free shipping a thing of the past. Cheaper, slower delivery options could become the new normal, leaving Australians weighing whether to pay extra for faster service. Currently, heavy freight trucks enjoy a fuel tax rebate that keeps delivery costs down and helps packages arrive quickly. Farmers and freight operators claim back part of the fuel tax they pay, the same rebate that has historically made online deliveries cheaper and faster. A new levy would reverse that advantage. The tax push has been supported by teal independents Kate Chaney, Allegra Spender, and Senator David Pocock, with Spender attending the roundtable discussions. The Productivity Commission, which spoke at the roundtable on Wednesday, is expected to recommend a higher fuel tax for heavy vehicles delivering goods across the country. On Thursday, Grattan Institute CEO Aruna Sathanapally will present to the group, with her organisation having previously expressed support for the tax. Meanwhile, the Greens, who hold significant influence in the Senate, are also backing the proposal. If implemented, the fuel tax could add up to 20.3 cents per litre on diesel and petrol for trucks, an 11 per cent increase based on last year's average fuel price of 181 cents per litre. Australia Post already charges a fuel levy for deliveries, with express services attracting up to 16.3 per cent and regular post 5.6 per cent. Any increase could see delivery times slow or costs rise further. Retailers may respond by raising free shipping thresholds or passing the extra costs directly to consumers, affecting everything from skincare to sneakers. Currently, heavy vehicles used on public roads receive a 20.3 cent per litre rebate for diesel and petrol, including E10, B5, and B20 blends with ethanol and biodiesel. Off-road fuel rebates are even higher, reaching up to 48.8 cents per litre between August 2023 and February 2024. National Road Association (NATRoad) CEO Warren Clark told Daily Mail the change would hurt the trucking and freight industry. 'The fuel tax system is broken and needs to be revamped. Measures like this will simply add to the increasing stress felt by the industry and we'll continue to see businesses being forced into administration' he said. 'More importantly, it would increase the cost of living which will hurt everyone.' He warned it would hurt families already dealing with cost-of-living. 'An increase in fuel tax at this time would be devastating for operators already struggling with rising costs and wafer-thin margins.' he said. 'The road freight sector has been under serious pressure for some time, with rising costs and no real productivity gains in the last decade. A reversal of these benefits could ripple through the delivery system and into shoppers' wallets.' The three-day roundtable will conclude on Thursday.