Anas Sarwar insists he won't slash benefits for Scots if he becomes next first minister
Anas Sarwar has insisted he would "absolutely not' slash disabled Scots' benefits if he became first minister despite supporting welfare reforms being pushed by the UK Government.
The Scottish Labour leader today claimed it was "factually wrong" to say people will have their benefits "cut" under measures proposed by Keir Starmer, because the overall welfare budget is still set to rise.
He said Labour is now in a 'much better place on welfare reform than a week ago', before it scaled back its proposals to avoid a defeat in the House of Commons.
Ministers hope a partial U-turn on the plans, which will protect existing claimants of personal independence payments (Pip) and the health element of universal credit, will be enough to win over Labour rebels.
Not all of the changes will directly impact people in Scotland as the personal independence payment (PIP) is being replaced by the adult disability payment.
The Scottish Government has promised not make similar cuts in Scotland, with the Social Justice Secretary warning that even the Prime Minister's concessions do not go far enough.
Shirley-Anne Somerville called on Labour to scrap all of its proposals, pointing to the UK Government's own analysis which shows it could plunge 150,000 people in poverty.
Sarwar said that figure did not take into account other Labour measures to help people get back into work, or economic policies such as a lift in the minimum wage.
Asked if he would cut benefits for disabled people in Scotland if he wins next year's Holyrood election, he said: 'No, absolutely not. The SNP has not got a leg to stand on here.
"This is a political party that's, let's be honest about it, whatever changes a UK Labour Government was making, it was always going to oppose them, because that's what they think their job is – to simply just shout from these sidelines.
"This is an SNP Government that is embedding structural poverty here in Scotland. There are 10,000 children homeless on the SNP's watch, stuck in temporary accommodation, when we have a housing emergency here in Scotland, and they're wholly responsible for housing in Scotland.'
The Scottish Labour leader insisted his party is "on the same wavelength" and agrees that reforms to the welfare system are needed.
But he said claims that benefits are being cut are not true, as the welfare bill is still set to rapidly grow.
The number of people claiming benefits for health related reasons has skyrocketed in recent years, with the UK Government last year predicting the numbers of working-age claimants of Pip in England and Wales could surge from 2.7 million in 2023-24 to 4.3 million in 2029-30.
At the time, the Office for Budget Responsibility said the overall benefits bill for working-age people would rise from £48.5 billion in 2024 to £75.7 billion by 2030.
'We all accept the principle of reform,' Mr Sarwar said. 'We all accept that we have to prioritise work, and that work is the best route of poverty.
'We all accept that. Those that can work should work.
'We also all accept that those who can't work should get the support they need, and also accept those that need support to get into work should get that support too.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
The welfare reform vote: All you need to know
Below, the PA news agency looks at what happened, what it means for personal independence payment (Pip) and universal credit, and what might come next. – What have MPs agreed to? MPs voted on Tuesday to allow the Government's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill to advance to the next stage in becoming law. Some 126 Labour backbenchers had previously threatened to vote against the legislation, enough to block its passage through the Commons, but in the end only 49 did so. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer could face a political headache as he seeks to repair fractured relations with his backbenchers (Carl Court/PA) But ministers were forced to offer a series of concessions to persuade the rebels to back the Government. – What concessions did the Government make? Last week, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall announced a partial U-turn aimed at heading off the rebellion that included three key points. Firstly, changes to Pip eligibility would only come into effect in November 2026, and anyone claiming the benefit before that date would not be subject to the new rules, instead of imposing the changes on everyone. Secondly, people claiming the health element of universal credit, and new claimants with the most severe conditions, would see their incomes protected in real terms. Thirdly, disabilities minister Sir Stephen Timms would conduct a review of the Pip assessment, 'co-produced' with disabled people. Sir Stephen Timms offered a further concession in the middle of the debate on the legislation on Tuesday (Jonathan Brady/PA) But during Tuesday's debate, Sir Stephen offered a further concession, saying any changes to Pip eligibility would only be introduced after his review had concluded, further delaying them. – What do the concessions mean for the Government's proposals? The decision to push back Pip changes to an unspecified date, and leave uncertain the details of what those changes will be, removes a major part of the Government's reform plans. The proposed changes to universal credit remain, raising the standard allowance while halving the health element for most new claimants from April 2026. But the concessions will also pose a problem for Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who will need to find extra money now the expected savings from welfare reform are no longer expected to materialise. Indeed, the Resolution Foundation think tank suggested the concessions meant there would now be no 'net savings' from the reform by 2029/30, a key year for Ms Reeves' fiscal targets. – What happens next? The Government has pledged to make the necessary amendments to remove the Pip changes from the Bill when it returns to the Commons next week. The concessions pose a problem for Chancellor Rachel Reeves (James Manning/PA) It is then likely to continue through Parliament, becoming law after it has been approved by both MPs and peers. But wider questions remain for the Government. Not only does Ms Reeves face a fiscal headache, but the Prime Minister could face a political one too as he seeks to repair fractured relations with his backbenchers. And uncertainty will continue to surround the Government's plans for welfare reform. Ministers will still want to reduce the cost of the welfare bill and get more people back into work, while Sir Stephen's Pip review could result in another row depending on what it recommends.
Evening Standard
32 minutes ago
- Evening Standard
The welfare reform vote: All you need to know
Firstly, changes to Pip eligibility would only come into effect in November 2026, and anyone claiming the benefit before that date would not be subject to the new rules, instead of imposing the changes on everyone.
Daily Mail
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE 'The French police? No problem!' Shocking boasts of smirking people smuggler to undercover MoS reporter shows why MPs are demanding to know what we get for the staggering £480m we give France to stem the tide of illegal migrants
Flanked by impassive henchmen deep inside a ramshackle migrant camp, the kingpin of a major people smuggling operation cracks into a cynical smirk. Laughing off any suggestion that the French police might stop his dinghies crossing to Britain, the trafficker boasts in broken English how the gendarmes not only pose 'no problem' for his criminal trade, but actually make it 'easy' for him. His damning comments – caught on video by undercover Mail on Sunday reporters last week – reveal just how little French authorities are doing to prevent the record numbers of small-boat crossings, despite receiving £480 million from the UK to tackle the issue. Though shocking, the ruthless Iraqi-Kurdish trafficker's assessment was proved right the very next morning. A boat crammed with more than 50 migrants sailed away from a beach near the tented migrants' village in Northern France as ten officers in riot gear stood idly by. The rare glimpse into the workings of a ruthless trafficker comes as part of a Mail on Sunday investigation into how these hardened criminals are running rings around police and making a mockery of Sir Keir Starmer 's vow to 'smash the gangs'. More than 15,000 people have arrived in the UK in small boats so far this year – up 42 per cent on the same period in 2024. Today, our investigation can reveal that: The Home Office fears police patrols in northern France are depleted in the busy summer months as officers are redeployed to the south to help with the tourist season; One gendarme said there were simply 'not enough' officers to deal with the number of migrants, despite the UK's huge handout to bolster patrols; Smugglers are now launching dinghies further up the coast then having migrants wade into the sea to board them, where police will not intervene; A migrant detention centre that was supposed to be built in Dunkirk with British taxpayers' money appears to be just an empty industrial site after construction was delayed. His damning comments – caught on video by undercover Mail on Sunday reporters last week – reveal just how little French authorities are doing to prevent the record numbers of small-boat crossings. Pictured: Migrants set off aboard a small boat from the beach at Gravelines The findings sparked outcry from MPs last night, with Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp slamming the French response as 'completely useless'. It is thought that well over 1,000 migrants are currently squatting in squalid camps around Calais and Dunkirk, waiting to take advantage of the calm summer seas to set sail for Britain. The Mail on Sunday found hundreds of men, women and children gathering around the town of Grande-Synthe, a suburb to the west of Dunkirk. Here they have established a self-sufficient commune akin to the notorious Calais 'jungle' that was shut down in 2016. Makeshift cafes feed dozens of hungry mouths, and barbers ply their trade. But these ramshackle settlements have also seen escalating violence between desperate migrants and callous people smugglers. Last weekend, a 27-year-old migrant from Yemen was shot twice at the jungle camp in neighbouring Loon-Plage, while two migrants and two security guards were killed in December. Frenzied activity surrounds a shopping centre in Grande-Synthe, where migrants top up on supplies before catching the free local bus service to and from the camps. It was here that our undercover reporters, posing as a family who wanted to get their Indian cousin across the Channel, met a young Sudanese migrant named Abbas, who led us to the headquarters of the kingpin people trafficker. After trekking through dense foliage and over a railway track, the group finally reached a small clearing dotted with tents, water stations and roaming chickens. Our reporters were interrogated by a series of henchmen, with one suspecting a police sting, before the boss finally emerged after almost an hour of nervous waiting. Wearing a blue hoodie and white baseball cap, the trafficker, who gave his name as Mamand, said he had boats up to 32ft long that could take around 55 migrants across the Channel at a cost of £1,270 each (€1,500) – meaning he could be pocketing up to £70,000 per trip. This is less than half what it often costs during winter, with the discounted price most likely due to the greater amount of business smugglers can do in fair weather. Smiling, he said the French police posed 'no problem' to his criminal enterprise. 'We send one boat, maybe the police take,' he said. 'But we take another [at the same time]. We send. We do not stop.' He told our undercover reporters: 'You can sleep here' ready for their crossing which 'may be tomorrow, maybe after tomorrow, maybe today. Which day water is good, if everything is good, we send.' To aid his faltering English, Mamand then used a cigarette lighter to illustrate how his boats slipped past beach patrols before being escorted to English waters by French maritime 'security'. Asked if this meant the French were helping the migrants, he replied: 'Only in water, help. If problem [with the dinghy in the water, they] come in. If no problem, go,' he said, waving his hands dismissively. Asked if this meant the journey was made easy, the trafficker replied: 'Yes.' His words underline growing frustration with the French navy, who have been accused of 'escorting' dinghies to English waters, intervening only if the boats run into trouble, but otherwise allowing their free passage. The following morning, the smuggler's claims played out with unerring accuracy. At about 5am on Wednesday, we watched on as a boat overloaded with migrants sailed from Gravelines beach – around 12 miles west of Dunkirk – where ten gendarmes stood idly by, either powerless or unwilling to stop them. At one point, a naval vessel sped towards the dinghy as it appeared to struggle in choppy waters. But once it seemed safe, the French boat turned back and left it on its way. The dinghy was one of six boats carrying 400 migrants that arrived in England that day. At about 5am on Wednesday, we watched on as a boat overloaded with migrants sailed from Gravelines beach – around 12 miles west of Dunkirk – where ten gendarmes stood idly by (pictured) French police say their hands are tied by maritime law, which means they are not allowed to intercept boats once they are in the water for safety reasons. On Wednesday morning another tactic was on display. While migrants gather at designated beachheads, smugglers launch their dinghies from a secret location elsewhere on the coast without passengers. When they get to the assembly points, the migrants wade into the sea and clamber on to the vessels – because once they are in the water the police do not intervene. Mamand said he had up to four pick-up spots around Dunkirk. One gendarme at Gravelines on Wednesday told us that he had been on patrol in town when three colleagues on the beach called for back-up after spotting a dinghy coming into view from the east. But by the time reinforcements arrived, there was nothing they could do, as the migrants were already boarding the boat. 'We try to do our best,' the officer said. 'As you can see, we are not going in the water because it's dangerous for us and it's dangerous for them. If you go in the water, you have to take care. 'If we try to stop them in the water and they drown, it is our fault under the law, currently.' He added: 'Three police for 50 migrants – it is not enough.' By Friday, though, the gendarme had seemingly overcome their reluctance to get wet, as officers were pictured knee-deep in water, dragging migrants ashore. In an apparent change in tactics, police even used tear gas and pepper spray to disperse migrants from the beach. The operation, though, was only a partial success, as some boats still made it out to sea. Meanwhile, a local politician in Boulogne, about 25 miles to the west of Calais, summed up the French attitude. 'OK, the British have given us millions of pounds and the cameras and drones help the gendarmes spot the migrants,' he said. 'But in England the authorities meet the migrants off the boats and take them to hotels. 'The impression we get is that the English are quite happy to see them. Otherwise why would they put them up in hotels? The magnet for the migrants has always been England. It's El Dorado. So let the migrants sail over to the UK and let the British sort out its problem.' Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'Despite the huge amounts of money we have paid them, the French response is completely useless. 'Migrants are able to circulate freely and even if they are stopped on the beach they are released so they can try again the next day. It is totally unacceptable that the French do not intercept at sea, as the Belgians do, but instead usher illegal immigrants into UK waters. 'It is no surprise that so far 2025 has been the worst year in history for illegal immigrants crossing the Channel. Labour's claim to smash the gangs lies in tatters.' Reform MP Lee Anderson said: 'None of this should come as any surprise. I went to the camps three years ago and it was obvious then that French police were turning a blind eye. Nothing has changed. 'I don't blame them – it's our fault. Fundamentally, by the time migrants reach Calais, they're in England. It might take them 20 attempts to get here, but they're not going anywhere else because they have so much help, not just from people traffickers but from non-government organisations. 'Arresting the traffickers won't work. Even if you lock up a gang leader for 30 years, 20 more will take his place because the cash rewards are so great. 'The only solution is to stop putting migrants in hotels when they arrive. Turn them around and send them straight back to France.' A Home Office spokesman said: 'We are strengthening our vital cooperation with France to disrupt the gangs behind these crossings. 'From this month, a new unit of dedicated officers has been mobilised to increase patrols along the northern coast of France. 'At the same time, the French authorities are working to amend their operational policy to allow maritime forces to intervene in shallow waters.'
