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.
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.
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.
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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
29 minutes ago
- Daily Record
John Swinney urged not to drop Scotland's ban on cash for weapons in face of Russia threat
The First Minister said he could 'reconsider' the SNP's longstanding policy against directly funding munitions amid the threat from Putin. John Swinney is under pressure not to drop the Scottish Government ban on sending public cash to weapons manufacturing projects. The First Minister last week revealed he could "reconsider" the longstanding policy due to the threat from Russia. It follows an internal review by its business quango, Scottish Enterprise, into its funding of arms companies. Scottish taxpayers have shelled out £8million in grants since 2019 to arms dealers like Leonardo, Raytheon and BAE Systems. The money is not currently allowed to go towards the direct manufacture of munitions, but critics describe the current system of human rights checks as "inadequate". The Scottish Greens and Amnesty International say cash has been awarded to firms involved in manufacture of F-35s and other military tech in Gaza. Greens MSP Patrick Harvie said: 'Scottish tax payers' money should never go towards companies arming regimes that commit war crimes. "In recent years the UK has armed Israel as it engaged in genocide, Saudi Arabia as it pursued a brutal war in Yemen, and Hong Kong and Egypt as they attacked pro-democracy protests. 'The SNP generally falls back on the 'no manufacture of munitions' line to defend the fact that they still fund companies complicit in such crimes. 'Far from retreating from their policy, they should strengthen it by applying human rights checks that actually mean something, instead of the rubber stamp currently applied." He added: 'There are hundreds of projects across the country that provide jobs and positive, productive outcomes for Scotland that would welcome financial support from the government. "There's simply no need to give it to arms dealers and war profiteers.' Swinney had previously said the government's stance against directly funding munitions would remain, with his Cabinet minister Mairi Gougeon previously saying it was based on the party's "principles". But speaking to the Holyrood Sources podcast last week, the SNP chief said: "I'm conscious we are living in a very different context today. The Russian threat is very real. We have to consider these questions." Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Deputy first minister Kate Forbes revealed this week a tighter regime of human rights checks for Scottish Enterprise funding of arms firms following a review, but opponents said it would effectively allow the status quo to continue. Neil Cowan, Scotland director at Amnesty International, said: 'The Scottish public must be assured that this review has not simply swept the issues under the carpet.'
The Guardian
41 minutes ago
- The Guardian
F1 chief wants to see record-breaking Silverstone stay on calendar for good
The Formula One chief executive, Stefano Domenicali, has said he would like the British Grand Prix at Silverstone to remain on the F1 calendar for ever, with the event set to host what is expected to be the largest meeting in the sport's history, reaching half a million people over four days this weekend. The British GP, which has been on the calendar since F1 began in 1950, is expected to sell out with record numbers and Domenicali acknowledged it was part of a large and thriving F1 business in Britain, which he hopes can be improved by working closer with the UK government when he meets the prime minister, Keir Starmer, and other government officials at Downing Street on Wednesday afternoon. Last year Silverstone extended its contract with F1 to host the race until 2034, one of many long-term deals the sport has concluded recently, including Austria extending to 2041 last week, but Domenicali said the British GP was such a unique event for the sport in size and interest it could negotiate a deal of even greater longevity. 'Silverstone has the right characteristics to stay for ever in the calendar,' he said. 'There's no other places where you can develop such a huge event in the UK. I don't see any other places, to be honest. 'In the past the relationship with the Silverstone promoters has been intense and they know that. Our approach is to find the best situation. I don't see Silverstone not being able, if they want, to do what others have already done. We've done already last year a big step, never done before.' The meeting on Wednesday, to celebrate F1's 75th anniversary, will include senior figures from F1, including drivers and team principals as well as apprentices and members of the all-female F1 Academy. It is hoped to be part of a developing relationship with the government to work better with the sport, notably in areas including infrastructure and over the effects of Brexit on F1, with seven of the 10 teams based in the UK. F1 is now an increasingly important industrial player in the UK. It is worth £12bn to the economy annually and employs 6,000 people directly, with a further 41,000 in the 4,500 associated supply chain companies. 'I will highlight to the prime minister the technology and the centres of excellence that are in the UK,' Domenicali said. 'Of the fact that with Brexit there are complications for movements, there are complications for the visas. I'm saying that because I think that it's relevant to keep the possibility for people to be attracted to work here. Because if you lose that link, then immediately the centre could be moving other places.' Sign up to The Recap The best of our sports journalism from the past seven days and a heads-up on the weekend's action after newsletter promotion Complications include the carnet system now required for moving equipment into Europe, which has knock-on effects in costs, time and notably sustainability. Visa issues for entry to the UK also still exist for those coming to work here in F1 and Domenicali hoped what is a continuing dialogue would prove fruitful. 'We have already formally presented in order to see if in the agenda of the government there will be a sort of attention to this, it's our duty to present respectfully in the right way to them,' he said. 'Of course, there is the hope for the government to understand if there is a way to have some exceptions or a way to work around the needs that we have. We will not decide the priority on which your government will dictate the agenda for the next step but we're going to do it in the right way.'
Reuters
2 hours ago
- Reuters
Starmer wins vote on UK welfare reform but suffers damaging rebellion
LONDON, July 1 (Reuters) - British Prime Minister Keir Starmer won a vote on his welfare plans on Tuesday at significant political cost as he suffered the biggest parliamentary rebellion of his premiership and was forced to back down on key parts of the package. After his lawmakers pushed him into a series of embarrassing U-turns to sharply scale back plans to cut benefits, lawmakers in the House of Commons gave their initial approval to a package of measures Starmer says are vital to securing the future of the welfare system. But the scale of the rebellion - with 49 Labour lawmakers voting against the reforms - underlined the prime minister's waning authority. A year after winning one of the largest parliamentary majorities in British history, Starmer has seen his personal approval ratings collapse and been forced into several policy reversals by his increasingly rebellious lawmakers. "It's been a bumpy time tonight," work and pensions minister Liz Kendall told reporters after a session of parliament when lawmakers took turns to mostly criticise the planned changes. "There are definitely lessons to learn from this process." Starmer came into office last year promising his big parliamentary majority would bring an end to the political chaos that defined much of the Conservative Party's 14 years in power. But the revolt over the welfare bill underlines the difficulty he has pushing through unpopular changes. In the run-up to the vote, ministers and party enforcers known as "whips" had been locked in frantic last-ditch lobbying of undecided members of parliament to try to win their backing. In a further concession to rebels about two hours before the vote, the government said it would not finalise changes in eligibility for a key benefit payment until a review into the welfare system had been completed. Paula Barker, a Labour member of parliament, called the attempt to pass the plans "the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen". In the end, the government suffered by far the biggest rebellion of Starmer's premiership, eclipsing the 16 members of parliament who opposed an infrastructure bill earlier this month. Mel Stride, the opposition Conservative Party finance policy chief, described Starmer's team as "a government that's lost control", only able to pass the legislation by having "ripped the heart of it out". Labour lawmaker Henry Tufnell said by agreeing to the concessions Starmer had shown "he's willing to take on board these criticisms that people have raised." Almost 90 disability and human rights groups before the vote urged lawmakers to vote down the legislation. The proposed reforms are designed to reduce the cost of Britain's growing welfare bill, which the government has described as economically indefensible and morally wrong. Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds the country's defence budget and is set to top 100 billion pounds ($137 billion) by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from 65 billion pounds now. More than half of the rise in working-age disability claims since the COVID-19 pandemic relates to mental health conditions, opens new tab, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank. The government had initially hoped to save 5 billion pounds ($6.9 billion) a year by 2030 by tightening rules for people to receive disability and sickness benefits. But after the government conceded to pressure from its lawmakers, it said the new rules would now apply only to future applicants, not to the millions of existing claimants as had been proposed. Analysts estimated the savings would likely be closer to 2 billion pounds. It was not clear how the additional last-minute change would impact the hoped-for savings in the welfare reform package. Opposition politicians said the government would now have to raise taxes or cut government spending elsewhere to balance the public finances in the annual budget later this year. The government has said there would be no permanent increase in borrowing, but has declined to comment on possible tax rises. While Starmer is under no immediate threat, and the next election is not expected until 2029, his party now trails behind Nigel Farage's populist Reform UK in opinion polls. John Curtice, Britain's most respected pollster, said this week that Starmer was the most unpopular elected prime minister in modern British history, and that voters still did not know what he stood for a year after he was elected.
