NI Communities Minister attacks ‘shameful' welfare reform plans
On a separate issue related to the benefits system, Mr Lyons said he had received confirmation from the Treasury that Stormont could potentially share in savings achieved by any Stormont-devised plan to target fraud around benefit payments in Northern Ireland.
The minister said he would now proceed with a business case on a fraud prevention plan with the hope of getting it on the agenda of the Executive for consideration.
At an appearance before his Assembly scrutiny committee, the minister also said that the Government's U-turn on eligibility for winter fuel payments for pensioners would result in 86% of pensioners in Northern Ireland (288,000) receiving the payment this coming winter – a proportion higher than the UK average of 80%.
Facing questions from MLAs at Stormont on Thursday, Mr Lyons also defended his own department's recently published draft poverty strategy, a document that has faced criticism from several community and civic society organisations.
The DUP minister's appearance came days after the UK Government was forced into a late climbdown on a central plank of its welfare reform agenda in a bid to avert a major backbench rebellion.
In a late concession on Tuesday, only 90 minutes before MPs were to vote on the Bill, ministers shelved plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), with any changes now only coming after a review of the benefit.
Mr Lyons was scathing of the Government's approach while giving evidence to the committee.
'I think it is important that I place on record just how appalled I am by this Labour Government and how they have conducted themselves over the last number of months,' he said.
'I believe their approach has been shameful. I believe that it has caused significant stress for many in our society, even those who I believe would never have been affected by the changes that have been proposed and those that perhaps would have been.
'It has caused a huge amount of stress.'
The minister added: 'We're at very early stages of assessment, but we believe ultimately that it will end up costing, it will not create any saving at all in Northern Ireland.
'So, I think that that has been an incredible mess, they've made a real hames of it, if I'm being honest.'
🗣️ Minister @GordonLyons1 is calling on you to take part.
Help shape @NIExecutive's Anti-Poverty Strategy by sharing your ideas and experiences.
Let's work together to tackle Poverty in society.
🔗 https://t.co/SMdqhZunuy pic.twitter.com/goJsJ7pEuh
— Communities NI (@CommunitiesNI) July 2, 2025
On the winter fuel payments, Mr Lyons said: 'There are 336,000 pensioners in Northern Ireland and HMRC are now estimating that 86% or 288,000 will receive the winter fuel payment in 25/26 because they have an income of less than £35,000.
'Twenty per cent will not receive it in the UK as a whole, that is only 14% in Northern Ireland. Again, another mess by this Government. It was inevitable that they would have had to have changed course.'
The minister said he had received confirmation on Thursday that Northern Ireland could potentially have a share of savings generated by any welfare fraud measures taken by the Executive.
'If there are savings through us tackling welfare fraud and error that are certified by the Office for Budget Responsibility, the Treasury will consider providing for us a share of those savings,' he said.
'And those savings are massive.
'A very, very small amount of money that we put in (to introduce fraud prevention measures) and you can get incredible savings from those.
'So that could be a net benefit to Northern Ireland. We will be progressing that business case.
'I have a paper with the Executive. I hope it will get on the agenda, because I think that could be very, very important.'
Mr Lyons faced several questions on his draft anti-poverty strategy.
The minister said he respected those who had criticised it, but made clear he did not agree with several of the claims that had been made about the plan lacking ambition and targets.
He said he remained open during the public consultation phase to listening to alternative proposals.
SDLP MLA Daniel McCrossan put it to the minister that Sinn Fein First Minister Michelle O'Neill had appeared to distance herself from his proposed strategy.
Mr Lyons said he never encountered any 'push back' from Executive colleagues when the draft proposals were presented to ministerial colleagues for consideration.
'I think it's safe to say there was not a lengthy debate around this issue, and I certainly left that Executive meeting believing there was good consensus on the way forward, and that we were open to consultation on this and to listening to what people had to say, and that there was broad agreement on what we had in front of us,' he said.
'I listen to what others have to say. I will do that through the consultation period, but I was not getting push-back at all within the Executive and I believe that there was good unity among Executive colleagues.
'I understand people can come under a bit of pressure, and they can change their positions, or they want to be seen to be on the right side, but I've taken on board all of the criticisms that have been made of this, and we will certainly listen to those.
'I believe a lot of those don't have a basis in reality.
'I hope I've explained and I've reassured the committee today about the approach that I am taking.
'But if anybody inside or outside the Executive have changes that they want to make to that that they haven't expressed to me so far, I'm open to listening to those, but I hope that they will also be willing to provide the funding that is necessary if it comes at an additional cost as well.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
21 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Reeves says welfare fallout ‘damaging' and declines to rule out tax hikes
The Chancellor warned there would be 'costs to what happened', as she faced questions about how she would cover a shortfall left by the Downing Street climbdown on planned cuts to disability benefits. The Government saw off the threat of a major Commons defeat over the legislation on Tuesday, after shelving plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) in the face of a backbench revolt. Rachel Reeves said she had never considered resigning as Chancellor (Jack Hill/The Times/PA) The original welfare proposals had been part of a package that ministers expected would save up to £5 billion a year, with economists warning that tax rises are now likely to plug a gap left by the concessions to rebels. The fallout threatens to cause lasting damage to morale in Labour ranks, with some MPs calling for a reset in relations between the parliamentary party and the leadership before fractures widen. Images of the Chancellor crying in the Commons on Wednesday also spooked the financial markets and led to questions about her future, though a Treasury spokesman said the tears were the result of a personal matter and Downing Street said she would remain in post. In an interview with the Guardian newspaper, Ms Reeves said she had never considered resigning, adding: 'I didn't work that hard to then quit.' She said she had gone to Prime Minister's Questions because she 'thought that was the right thing to do' but that 'in retrospect, I probably wished I hadn't gone in… (on) a tough day in the office'. Ms Reeves added: 'It's been damaging. 'I'm not going to deny that, but I think where we are now, with a review led by (disability minister) Stephen Timms, who is obviously incredibly respected and has a huge amount of experience, that's the route we're taking now.' Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said the Government is still committed to welfare reform, but ministers will now wait for the conclusions of the Timms review before implementing changes to Pip.
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
I shouldn't have gone to PMQs, says Reeves
Rachel Reeves has admitted she regrets attending prime minister's questions after she was seen in tears on the Government front bench. The Chancellor said she had been dealing with a 'personal issue' when her bottom lip shook and tears ran down her face during a moment of distress in Parliament on Wednesday. Ms Reeves was speaking after she made a surprise appearance alongside Sir Keir Starmer to unveil the Government's 10-year plan for the NHS. In an interview with The Guardian, Ms Reeves said she regretted going into PMQs after a 'tough day at the office', but hoped people 'could relate' to her distress. She said: 'In retrospect, I probably wished I hadn't gone in... But you know, it is what it is.' The Leeds West and Pudsey MP said she never thought about resigning despite backbench anger over the way she had handled the economy, adding: 'I didn't work that hard to then quit.' A backbench rebellion saw the government forced to drop key welfare cuts, which has left the Chancellor with a £5 billion black hole to fill. She has insisted she is 'totally' up for the job of Chancellor and asserted that she and the Prime Minister remain united. Ms Reeves said: 'People can see that Keir and me are a team.' Sir Keir stood by his Chancellor in the aftermath, telling BBC Radio 4 Today's Nick Robinson: 'She is going to be Chancellor into the next election and for many years afterwards.' He was quick to deny any political link to her tears, insisting it was a personal matter, saying: 'I'm not going to go into the personal matter of a colleague.' Labour insiders have claimed that the Chancellor has made herself 'unsackable' after the public tears. A government source said that Sir Keir 'seems to have tied himself to her' after her tears, which triggered a £3 billion market sell-off and crash in the pound's value. 'I thought at the beginning of Wednesday she would go, then thought it was confirmed when I saw her crying at PMQs but then she didn't,' said the source. Another source said Ms Reeves had enjoyed an 'outpouring of sympathy' over an incident that was still 'inescapably linked to the political facts' of the welfare rebellion. A third added that being pictured distraught on television had 'shored up her position'. In a turbulent week for the government, Ms Reeves refused to rule out tax rises in the autumn budget, saying: 'I'm not going to, because it would be irresponsible to do that. 'We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement. 'So we'll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.'
Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE 'Why would I get a job? I get your monthly wage in a week!' As Starmer's bid to cut disability benefits is sunk by Labour MPs, social media tutorials show claimants how to milk the system - and you'll be the one left feeling sick
As anyone who has had the misfortune of dealing with civil service bureaucracy will know, it can be a complicated endeavour. There is the jargon, the minutes that bleed into hours spent on hold on the phone and, of course, the endless form-filling. But mastering this red tape – particularly in relation to Britain's bloated benefits system – can apparently also present extraordinarily lucrative business opportunities. Just ask Charlie Anderson, a YouTube blogger who says her chronic arthritis and fatigue has rendered her unable to work. Thanks to her lengthy experience with the welfare system, she is extremely proficient at filling out forms used to claim the Personal Independence Payment [PIP] allowance disability benefit. So adept has she become in applying for this taxpayer-funded help that she has taken to explaining the 'tricks of the trade' to any prospective benefits claimant – for a hefty fee, of course. For £750, Ms Anderson will provide a three-hour online consultation in which she will discuss the best way to fill out a PIP claim form. If she can work her magic, the pricey up-front outlay will quickly be repaid by the taxpayer. She also offers a premium service to people whose initial PIP claim was turned down. Her £950 fee includes a four-hour, one-to-one video call during which Ms Anderson will talk them through their 'mandatory reconsideration' – civil service-speak for a free appeal. All from the comfort of her shed-turned-office at the bottom of her garden in Bucknall, Staffordshire. Charlie Anderson, a YouTube blogger who says her chronic arthritis and fatigue has rendered her unable to work, charges disability benefit applicants large fees for help explaining the 'tricks of the trade' Remarkably, Ms Anderson – whose YouTube tutorials and emotional diatribes against the state of Britain's benefits system have attracted almost four million views – claims that she has a '100 per cent success rate at winning PIP' and has 'helped over 150 people receive their PIP claims'. A video with more than 200,000 views starts with a bouncy, 'Hi, my name is Charlie and I'm really good at PIP'. She then describes the 'trickery' used by the Government's assessors. If asked whether you can go to the shops or hospital unaided, don't say yes, she warns, or you won't be awarded benefits. Despite the fact that her tutorials have attracted criticism from various quarters, business is apparently booming – with Ms Anderson even seemingly 'employing' two people to assist her in administering her customer base. The 46-year-old is far from the only online influencer – or 'sickfluencer' – exploiting a lucrative market in helping claimants navigate the welfare system's complexities. Take Whitney Ainscough, who boasts 750,000 followers across TikTok and Instagram. The Range Rover-driving 31-year-old mother from Rotherham, South Yorkshire, says her lifestyle is funded by benefits, claiming in one video posted in May that she receives £1,151.90 a week. 'Why would I get a job?' she said. 'I get your monthly wage in a week. Why would I go out and get a job? I'm living my f***ing best life.' In another video from earlier this year she advised her followers to withdraw their PIP money in cash so nobody would be able to track what it was being spent on. It is this sort of abuse of the system that the Government sought to address with its £5billion cuts to the ballooning welfare budget announced earlier this year. But ministers were this week forced into a humiliating climbdown following a rebellion by Labour MPs. Now there will be no reform of PIP rules until the Government has had time to consider a review of current procedures. One anonymous Labour MP said the series of U-turns on the bill had turned it into 'a total clusterf**k of Godzilla proportions'. Mel Stride, the shadow chancellor, said: 'This farcical climbdown is the most humiliating moment of Labour's first year in office.' But it's not hard to see why the Government targeted disability benefits for cuts. Around one in ten working-age adults – some four million people – are claiming either disability or incapacity benefit, up from less than three million six years ago. This means taxpayers are footing a bill of £70billion a year for such claimants – up £20billion since the pandemic. One of the key factors behind this surge is the number of people reporting mental health conditions such as anxiety or depression as what makes them eligible for PIP. Earlier this year, Health Secretary Wes Streeting said there was an 'overdiagnosis' of mental health conditions, contributing to 1,000 new PIP claimants every day. Even those suffering from conditions such as acne, alcoholism and Tourette syndrome (a neurological condition that causes involuntary, repetitive movements and sounds) are receiving welfare payments. The Mail can reveal that last year alone, more than £2billion was paid out in benefits to claimants suffering from mixed anxiety and depressive disorders – an average of around £6,600 per claimant. The figures compiled by the Taxpayers' Alliance also reveal £291million was spent on almost 47,000 claimants who cited anxiety disorders as their main condition and more than £26million was paid out to help people with obesity. Another £60million went to 9,000 people claiming to have Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD). This absurd liberalisation of the system has not gone unnoticed by bloggers such as Chantelle Knight. The Southampton-based 43-year-old has told her TikTok followers that sufferers of conditions such as ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder) don't need an official medical diagnosis to get benefits but just to show how the condition affects their everyday life – advice echoed by Charlie Anderson. In another TikTok video, Ms Knight said: 'I have a client with ADHD who is undiagnosed. And I've just secured him an award of high rate daily living allowance and low rate mobility [payments made on the basis of how serious the client's perceived disability is]. 'He doesn't have a diagnosis. And it just goes to show you can have an abundance of diagnoses and no evidence and not get an award. Equally you can have an abundance of evidence and no diagnosis and get the award.' Last month, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled that Ms Knight had breached advertising rules for 'potentially harmful' promotions of a saffron-based food supplement via her website and 'irresponsibly discouraged' people from taking medically-prescribed treatments for ADHD. Last night, her website appeared to have been closed. It would seem that one of the main contributory factors to this trend is the fact that many PIP claimants are no longer obliged to attend a face-to-face assessment. The switch to assessments carried out over the phone started in the pandemic when lockdowns made in-person ones impossible. Outsourcing firm Maximus, which conducts PIP assessments on behalf of the Government in the north of England and Scotland, says on its website that some assessments can even be completed solely based on the information provided in the initial form. It then says that 'if there is not enough information to complete the assessment, you will be invited to attend a consultation'. 'Most consultations are carried out by telephone,' it adds, 'but we may invite you to a video or face-to-face consultation if needed.' Critics say the use of telephone assessments makes it easier for claimants to exaggerate their symptoms because the assessor is not in a position to scrutinise their condition properly. In December, former assessor Michael Houston told a Channel 4 Dispatches documentary that 'people were encouraged to do six cases a day' and that they received cash incentives to process more. 'If you did any more than that, you would get £80 per case,' he added. 'If the claimant met the highest category [of sickness benefit] then the assessment could be curtailed early. This would allow them to fit in more cases per day.' As the phone interviews are not recorded, leaving no way of checking if guidelines are being applied properly, the system is vulnerable to abuse. Former Spectator editor Fraser Nelson, who made the Dispatches documentary, recently argued that returning to face-to-face interviews is vital if the welfare budget is to be brought under control. He said: 'Record and spot-check all claims, not just rejected ones. Publish all sickness benefit data, daily. How many applied and were approved? How many bonuses were paid? Such transparency could be transformative. A Covid-style live data dashboard would focus minds more than any ministerial edict.' But to understand why the welfare reforms provoked such outrage, it's worth looking at what the Government initially wanted to do. PIP is not means-tested and does not affect other benefits or the benefits cap. It can even be claimed if you are working. It includes a daily living component and a mobility component. To be entitled to the daily living part, claimants need to explain how much difficulty they have performing everyday activities, including tasks such as cooking, washing and getting dressed or undressed. A points system is used where, for example, requiring supervision or assistance to prepare or cook a simple meal would be awarded four points. Being completely unable to prepare and cook food would warrant eight points. Under the Government's initial proposals, claimants would have needed to score a minimum of four points on at least one activity to be eligible for that component – rather than a range of different ones. But scrapping the change was one of the Government's concessions to the rebels on Tuesday. People claiming daily living payments can receive the standard weekly rate of £73.90 or an enhanced one of £110.40, depending on their level of difficulty performing the relevant tasks. The mobility part comprises a standard rate of £29.20 per week or an enhanced rate of £77.05 per week. Those who qualify for the higher rate can also choose to exchange this for a car under the Motability scheme. This arrangement came under fire after it emerged it accounts for one in five new cars sold in Britain and, in March, the Mail revealed that the company behind the scheme is sitting on a £4billion stockpile of reserves – including £1.3billion in cash in the bank. So many people are now entitled to disability benefits that, in some parts of the country, an astonishing one in five people are in receipt of handouts. In the Welsh county of Blaenau Gwent, 211 out of every 1,000 people are claiming PIP – the highest proportion in the country. In Sunderland, the figure stands at 173 per 1,000 people and, in this PIP hotspot on Thursday afternoon, sisters Maureen and Mary Robey and their friend Olga Koch were enjoying the sunshine in the city centre. All three have been claiming PIP for a number of years. Maureen, 71, said she was finally granted the £600-a-month benefit following a phone consultation. 'It wasn't as easy as it could have been to claim PIP,' she said. 'I wasn't expecting to have to answer questions over the phone. I had been told that filling out a form would be all I needed to do. But I filled out a long form and my doctor's notes were sent over to back up my claim. I expected the money to be sent to my account quickly after. 'They rang me and asked questions about my COPD [Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease], which I didn't think was necessary. 'All three of us have been on it for years and it's helped to make our lives easier, so this uncertainty about it being reformed has caused some concern.' Mary, 72, said she has anxiety and depression but her PIP claim was initially rejected. 'I turned to Age Concern for help and they filled out my forms for me,' she said. 'It was only after their involvement that I got the help I needed.' Under PIP terms, new claims cannot be made after reaching state pension age. But if you already get PIP and hit pension age, your payments continue. Former soldier John Heskett, 73, said he believed there were a number of people in the city fooling the system: 'There are a lot of kidders out there who are claiming PIP when there's not a thing wrong with them. 'I know of people in this town who are claiming and they're fitter than me. I have problems with my legs and I know I would qualify but I don't ask for help when I don't feel I need it. 'Everyone should be tested properly because people are working the system.' Back online, Charlie Anderson, as part of her £750 online tutorial, says she will analyse answers to ensure 'what we write matches your life AND is communicated in a way that suits the DWP [Department for Work and Pensions] so they can assess you.' Ms Anderson, with more than 52,000 YouTube subscribers, then says she can send answers back so the claimant can 'copy what we wrote straight on to your form'. She adds: 'By the end of the meeting, you will feel much better and you will probably have the best nap you have had in years!' Last night, a spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions hit out at those trying to cash in on the benefits boom. 'We condemn attempts to charge people for support with their PIP applications, and strongly encourage customers to seek additional support through free channels, such as, the website, our dedicated helpline, and relevant charities,' he said. 'And we are bringing forward the biggest fraud crackdown in a generation as part of wider plans that will save £9.6billion by 2030 – protecting taxpayers' money and investing in our public services through our Plan for Change.'
