Starmer to press on with welfare reforms as 120 Labour MPs prepare to defy him
The Prime Minister confirmed a Commons vote on the plans to squeeze sickness and incapacity benefits will go ahead on Tuesday despite 120 Labour MPs publicly backing a move to block the legislation.
He acknowledged it is 'tough going' but 'the important thing is to focus on the change that we want to bring about' rather than the 'noises off'.
Sir Keir defended his leadership against accusations he had misjudged the mood in his party, insisting he is 'comfortable with reading the room'.
At a press conference at the Nato summit in The Hague, he said: 'Many people predicted before the election that we couldn't read the room, we hadn't got the politics right and we wouldn't win an election after 2019 because we lost so badly.
'That was the constant charge of me at press conferences like this, and we got a landslide victory. So I'm comfortable with reading the room and delivering the change the country needs.'
He added: 'Is it tough going? Are there plenty of people and noises off? Yes, of course, there always are, there always have been, there always will be.
'But the important thing is to focus on the change that we want to bring about.'
He said he is 'very confident' he will lead the Labour Party into the next election, saying 'it is really important that I lead from the front and take the long-term decisions about the future of our country'.
The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill faces its first Commons test on Tuesday.
The plans restrict eligibility for personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limit the sickness-related element of universal credit, with the aim of getting more people back into work and saving up to £5 billion a year.
Existing claimants will be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support, a move seen as a bid to head off opposition.
But the fact so many Labour MPs are prepared to put their names to a 'reasoned amendment', a move which would stop the Bill in its tracks, shows how entrenched the opposition is.
Sir Keir indicated he is not willing to compromise.
'We have got to make the reforms to our system. It isn't working as it is,' he said.
'It doesn't work as it stands for people who desperately need help to get into work or for people who need protection. It is broken.
'We were elected in to change that which is broken, and that's what we will do, and that's why we will press ahead with reforms.'
The rebels argue disabled people have not been properly consulted about the plan and say further analysis is required before making any changes.
Social security minister Sir Stephen Timms said he is 'looking forward to the debate' next week.
He told the Commons Work and Pensions Committee the changes need to be made urgently to cut the spiralling welfare bill.
Committee chairwoman Debbie Abrahams, who is one of the Labour MPs to have signed the amendment to block the legislation, asked why the provisions within the Bill had not been consulted on.
Sir Stephen said: 'Essentially because of the urgency of the changes needing to be made.'
He said the cost of Pip had gone up from £12 billion before the pandemic to £22 billion last year, 'and that is not a sustainable trajectory'.
Setting out the impact of the reforms, he told the committee that 370,000 people getting Pip under the current system would not be receiving it by the end of the decade.
'That will be a number of people whose income is lower,' he said.
'Of course, I'd love it for many of those to be able to move into work, and we're going to be providing the employment support to make that ambition realistic for people in a way that it hasn't been in the past.'
Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham has added his voice to the senior figures calling on the Government to reconsider.
He told BBC Newsnight: 'When the PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party) delivers its collective wisdom in such numbers, it is invariably right. And it is right on this.'
His London counterpart, Sir Sadiq Khan, has said ministers 'must urgently think again' about the plans, while Labour's First Minister of Wales Baroness Eluned Morgan has also called for a rethink.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, who has already taken steps to soften the impact of the welfare Bill, has been locked in talks with backbenchers as she seeks to win over those opposed to the measures.
Meanwhile, Kemi Badenoch said the Tories will lend the Government votes to pass the legislation but only if Labour rules out tax rises in the autumn budget as well as reducing unemployment and lowering the welfare budget.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
35 minutes ago
- The National
Wes Streeting forced to admit Labour wants fewer people claiming Pip
Wes Streeting was interviewed on Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme by Victoria Derbyshire, who was filling in for Kuenssberg, about the UK Government's proposed cuts to welfare, which have been described as a 'two-tier disability system' by campaigners. The UK government confirmed on Friday evening that it will make major changes to its planned welfare cuts, aiming to avoid a rebellion by more than 120 Labour backbenchers. Under the new plan, people already receiving Personal Independence Payments (Pip) or the health element of Universal Credit will keep getting them. However, the cuts will apply to future claimants. READ MORE: Police 'examining' Kneecap and Bob Vylan Glastonbury Festival performances When pressed by Derbyshire, Streeting was forced to admit that the Labour Government is planning on having fewer people able to claim disability benefits by reforming the welfare system. During the interview, Derbyshire said: 'Members of the cabinet, you on this program this morning, and the Prime Minister have said it previously, the current system is not sustainable. 'But even after your review, the bottom line is you want fewer people in receipt of Pip, fewer disabled people in receipt of Pip, don't you?' Streeting replied: 'Well, we want to make sure we're getting the line in the right place in terms of.' To which Derbyshire cut him off and asked: 'So, the answer is yes. You want fewer disabled people claiming Pip.' (Image: BBC) Streeting continued: 'I think 1000 more people, coming on every day, like it's not sustainable in its current form, it's just not. 'And unless we address that issue, we've got to do it in a fair way. 'We've got to do it in the right way.' Derbyshire interrupted Streeting again saying: 'But you won't say that out loud. Why not?' Streeting replied: 'Well I just did.' Derbyshire then asked for clarification that there will be fewer disabled people able to claim Pip. To which Streeting replied: 'I literally just said, we've got to make sure that in terms of where we are, where we draw the line, where we get it right, that it is sustainable for the longer term.' MPs are expected to vote on the welfare reform bill on Tuesday at Westminster which the UK Government will be hoping to pass after it offered Labour rebels a series of concessions in an effort to head off Keir Starmer's first major Commons defeat since coming to power. The UK Government's original package had restricted eligibility for Pip, the main disability payment in England, and cut the health-related element of Universal Credit, saying this would save around £5 billion a year by 2030. Now, the changes to Pip eligibility will be implemented in November 2026 and apply to new claimants only while all existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. Speaking on Times Radio earlier this week, campaigner at Disability Rights UK Mikey Erhardt said: 'The idea that you will be less in need, or less deserving of support, depending on the when of the condition that necessitates that support, is something you just have to reject out and out.' Meanwhile, Ian Greaves, who edits the Disability Rights Handbook containing in-depth information on the social security system across the UK, said Labour's 'very small' concessions on welfare reforms will still leave the system 'woefully inadequate'.
The Herald Scotland
41 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Ian Blackford calls on SNP to support defence industry
At this week's NATO summit, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer committed to raising defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. READ MORE Mr Blackford said this was a "seismic shift" and would have "massive implications for the budgets of every government department over the next decade." "Though in these islands we have excellence in many aspects of our armed forces, to a large extent our military capability has been hollowed out," he wrote. "The need to enhance defence capability and at pace is stark. "There is now a race to invest and if we take last year's defence spending of £53.9 billion as our base, we are going to have to find by 2035 an extra £60 billion plus a year to invest in defence. "Where is this to come from?" The former MP said 'difficult choices' would need to be made. He argued that defence funding should not be seen as a moral compromise, but as an economic lever. "Austerity will be a price to be paid as a consequence of having to invest in our national security. "Investment in defence, though, can be a lever and transformative in itself in generating economic growth." He noted that the industry already supports 33,500 workers in Scotland and contributes £3.2 billion in gross value. "We all want a high-growth, high-wage, high-productivity Scotland—a society that drives investment in skills and innovation." The SNP has long opposed public money being spent on munitions. The Scottish National Investment Bank's ethical investment policy currently bars organisations 'primarily engaged in the manufacture of munitions or weapons' from receiving support. Ian Blackford calling on the SNP to embrace the defence sector (Image: PA) Recently, a new welding centre—backed by Rolls-Royce and intended to support Royal Navy submarine construction—was denied funding by Scottish Enterprise. The UK Government has since stepped in to fund the initiative. The SNP has faced accusations of hypocrisy, as the Scottish Government funds Ferguson Marine, which is subcontracted by BAE to work on Royal Navy frigates. Mr Blackford's intervention comes as John Swinney faces mounting internal and external pressure to reconsider his government's position. Recently, the First Minister suggested the policy could be "reconsidered" given the growing threat from Russia. Speaking on the Holyrood Sources podcast, he said: "I'm conscious we are living in a very different context today. I do think the Russian threat is very real. We have to consider these questions." He added he had no objections if a company wished to set up a munitions factory in Scotland. The First Minister added: "We do not use public money to support the manufacture of munitions but will support skills and defence companies." Speaking to Scotland on Sunday, Stewart McDonald, the SNP's former defence spokesperson at Westminster, said it was time for the party to look again at the policy. "It hasn't had a proper defence debate since 2012, when we changed the policy on NATO," he said. "All of this is moving at such pace. The entire international picture is moving at a rapid pace and if we are a party that seeks to be an independent state—and an independent state in NATO and the EU—then we should have stuff to say on this." Mr McDonald warned: "There is a risk the party falls behind in that debate." He said: "That's a debate going on in capitals across Europe. And although Edinburgh is not a state capital, the Scottish Government has a role to play as a domestic partner. "We have an industry in Scotland worth many billions of pounds, employing somewhere between 33,000 and 35,000 people, and it has a very awkward relationship with the Scottish Government—it has done so for a long time." He suggested Mr Swinney should gather major and smaller defence employers in Scotland, invite the defence procurement minister from London, and ask: "How do I marshal the resources of the government—spending, policy, legislative—to better support this?" "I understand there's a bit of political balancing to be done here, but I think that can be over-thought and over-egged," he added. "We do live in much more dangerous times and there's a risk we are just saying the same stuff we've been saying for a long time—and that just would not be credible to stand still politically as the entire world changes around you." Mr McDonald branded the Scottish Enterprise ban on munitions-related investment "a stupid policy" and criticised restrictions at the Scottish National Investment Bank. Meanwhile, in the Sunday Mail, Labour's Scottish Secretary, Ian Murray, called on the SNP to reverse its opposition to nuclear weapons entirely. "Any responsible government has to make sure they put their national security and the safety of their own people first. "Scots only have to turn on their TVs and pick up their newspapers to read about the fact that there is a changing global instability. "I do think the Scottish Government should readdress it." Previously, Mr Murray described himself as a 'lifelong unilateralist' and was one of 2000 parliamentarians to have signed the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) pledge, which obliges signatories to work for their respective nations to sign up to a worldwide ban on nuclear weapons through the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). He added: "My views on nuclear weapons changed some time ago but they have been underlined and emphasised by the fact that the issue of nuclear weapons and deterrence has become a huge global stability issue. "For the Scottish Government to tell Rolls-Royce, one of the most respected British institutions, that they will not contribute to them investing in a highly skilled welding academy in Glasgow tells the public that they do not care about jobs, growth and opportunities for the future. "That is a huge part of the defence dividend we should be trying to capture. Places like Babcock and BAE Systems are hiring foreign welders from the Philippines and South Africa to do the work local people should be doing." READ MORE However, SNP defence spokesperson Dave Doogan told the paper that the party remained 'resolute' in its opposition to nuclear weapons. "We believe we're firmly in step with the vast majority of civil society in Scotland on that point. "Ian Murray, consistent with many other issues, is not in step with the majority of civil society in Scotland. "I've spoken to armed forces professionals who deal with the nuclear deterrent and nobody talks about it in the triumphant way in which Westminster politicians of the two main parties do." Any change in the Scottish Government's policy would likely be met with opposition from the Scottish Greens.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
A British Leyland of TV is the Government's worst idea yet
A show about a good-looking human rights lawyer who becomes a triumphant, reforming prime minister? Or a mini-series about a brilliant, glamorous economist who becomes Britain's first female chancellor? Perhaps a movie about a fiery red-head who works her way up from poverty to become the most powerful woman in the country? As the Government paves the way for a potential merger between ITV, Channel 4, and Channel 5 to create a single, state-backed commercial broadcaster, it is not hard to imagine the kind of shows it might commission. But hold on. A British Leyland of television is the Government's worst idea yet. What the industry actually needs is more competition – not less. It may still be a few years off. But Sir Keir Starmer's Labour Government is very clearly paving the way for a major consolidation of the British broadcasting industry. Last week, as part of its shiny new 'industrial strategy', it opened the door to removing the barriers that prevent a merger between the existing terrestrial broadcasters. Apparently, ministers will examine 'possible consolidation between broadcasters', along with 'closer strategic partnerships'. Meanwhile, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and Ofcom will be asked to review their definitions of 'television advertising' to include YouTube and Netflix, which again will make mergers easier. Add it all up, and it is not hard to see where this is going. We will need a single, state-backed commercial broadcaster to cope with a changing market, stand up to the American streaming giants, and preserve what used to be one of the UK's strongest industries. Heck, they could even bring in the marketing whizzes who gave us Great British Energy and Great British Railways to come up with the branding for Great British Television. Of course, we all understand that something needs to be done. In a world where streaming dominates, and with most people under 30 barely even aware of what traditional broadcasting through signals and aerials was, the industry is in an increasingly dire position. ITV, the biggest of the three, has seen its share price slump from 265p 10 years ago to just 80p now, and the broadcaster is only worth £3bn. There has already been plenty of speculation about a break-up, perhaps with a sale of its production unit, or else a full-scale takeover of the company, probably by a foreign buyer. Channel 4 has been slashing jobs and cutting back on its programming budget as it grapples with a declining advertising market. Meanwhile, Channel 5, which has never been a huge success since it was launched in 1997, is also potentially in play as its American owner Paramount prepares for a takeover by media company Skydance. Why not put all three together and create a new British-owned powerhouse in commercial broadcasting?
