logo
Tears and fury of the Labour rebels: did Reeves go too far over welfare?

Tears and fury of the Labour rebels: did Reeves go too far over welfare?

Timesa day ago

It was a private conversation that illustrated the moral and political stakes of the government's welfare reforms.
On one end of the line was Rachel Reeves, in the midst of a round of calls to MPs who were conveying their profound misgivings about the proposals to restrict access to personal independence payments. On the other was Marie Tidball, who was elected as MP for Penistone & Stocksbridge, south Yorkshire, last year.
In common with plenty of Labour backbenchers in that intake, she feels Keir Starmer's election was a repudiation of austerity, not an endorsement of Reeves's language of fiscal rectitude and 'difficult choices'.
But Tidball is also unique. She is the only visibly physically disabled MP in the Commons: a former Oxford academic whose congenital condition means all four of her limbs are foreshortened.
With Reeves threatening to slash the benefits to which people like her are entitled, she insisted on a direct dialogue. According to sources, the conversation did not go well. Tidball is said to have been left in tears and although the chancellor got in touch over text shortly afterwards to smooth things over, the damage was done.
Within hours, MPs were discussing in hushed tones claims that Reeves 'shouted' at Tidball and even threatened to have the whip withdrawn if she signed the reasoned amendment that eventually prompted No 10's U-turn. Those close to Reeves say she made no such threat — pointing out the whip is not in her gift to withdraw and shouting is not in her nature. They also point out it was Tidball who asked for the call, disputing any notion Reeves went looking for a confrontation.
However, Tidball is understood to have been dismayed and deeply shaken by the week's events — in which her priority has been ensuring the government fulfils its manifesto pledges to champion the disabled while supporting them back into work.
The high-stakes exchange capped one of the worst weeks for Starmer and Reeves since the pair entered Downing Street a year ago.
• The Sunday Times view: A year on, Labour is a long way from fixing Britain
Where once Starmer and his chancellor appeared unassailable after the party's landslide victory, they are now facing mutiny from an army of Labour MPs and growing impatience from an increasingly fractious cabinet.
With discipline breaking down, especially among MPs who fear they may only serve one term given Labour's dramatic decline in the polls, the biggest concern among advisers is that paralysis will now set in and Starmer will be prevented from pursuing the type of radical change that got his party elected: in particular, the ability for the government to pass an immigration bill and introduce special educational needs reforms to increase the number of children in mainstream schools and reduce those attending expensive independently run special schools.
• Keir Starmer approval rating: tracking the PM's popularity
'There is blood in the water now,' said one senior Labour figure. 'The soft-left were always going to do for Labour and so it now seems to be coming to pass.'
Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister's most senior adviser, is in the firing line after three significant U-turns in the space of a month: on winter fuel payments, grooming gangs and now welfare.
Labour MPs blame him for alienating and ignoring backbenchers and presiding over a 'bunker mentality' in No 10, leading some to suggest that the time has come for 'regime change'.
These calls are only likely to grow louder this weekend after claims McSweeney's plans to stave off the rebellion involved suspending 10 Labour rebels every hour until 50 had been reached. At which point, McSweeney is said to have insisted the insurrection would be over.
It is understood that McSweeney, who denies the specifics of the allegation, was told that the scale of the rebellion was such that the usual sanctions — removing the whip — would have little or no impact.
Despite the whips privately briefing No 10 for weeks that there would have to be concessions, Starmer and Reeves ignored the warnings. To the fury of backbenchers, Reeves, who is facing mounting questions about her future, insisted on Monday that there would be 'no U-turn', while on Wednesday the prime minister dismissed the revolt as 'noises off' at a Nato press conference in the Hague.
Within hours of those comments, which only added to the sense of disconnect between No 10 and MPs, Starmer and Reeves were told that contingency plans, which had been drawn up months ago, were being presented to rebels.
Neither of them took part in the negotiations — another sign of the distance that has grown between Downing Street and the back benches. Starmer, who has only voted seven times since becoming prime minister, and MPs claim is notably absent from the Commons tearooms, was represented in the talks by McSweeney.
The concessions offered were even bigger than expected, with the government agreeing to protect existing claimants of personal independence payments (PIP), a disability benefit, and universal credit for all existing claimants, at a cost of more than £3 billion.
There was also a pledge that more fundamental changes to the criteria by which PIP payments are calculated in future will only be done in collaboration with disability groups, which is likely to end up costing the government even more money.
Downing Street has since failed to rule out tax rises to pay for the changes, which have been welcomed by Meg Hillier, one of the rebels behind the wrecking amendment. She described the concessions as 'a good deal' involving 'massive changes' to protect vulnerable people and involve disabled people in the design of future reforms.
But the deal does not satisfy all the rebels. Several came out to say they still would still not back the government on Tuesday, while others are threatening to lay another 'reasoned amendment' to kill the bill which they claimed could be signed by as many as 50 MPs.
On Saturday, Unite, one of the country's biggest trade unions and funders of the Labour Party, called for the entire welfare bill to be dropped and for the government to start again. It claims the proposal to limit PIP to new claimants will create a two-tier workforce resulting in far greater injustice.
Sharon Graham, the Unite general secretary, said: 'Why do Labour keep making the same mistakes, attacking the most vulnerable in our society? The government's latest plans for disabled benefits cuts are divisive and sinister. Creating a two-tier system where younger disabled people and those who become disabled in the future will be disadvantaged and denied access to work and education is morally wrong.'
Graham has found herself an unlikely ally in Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party leader, who will warn this week that Labour has created a 'punishing welfare trap that shuts people out of going back to work'.
In a speech to the Local Government Association Annual Conference in Liverpool on Wednesday, Badenoch will also spell out the political trap the prime minister has now fallen into with his tax-and-spend plans in chaos and being dictated to by his own MPs.
'Labour told us 'the adults were back in charge', but this is actually amateur hour,' Badenoch will say. 'The prime minister is incapable of sticking to a decision. If he can't make relatively small savings to a benefits bill that is set to exceed £100 billion by 2030, how can we expect him to meet his promised 5 per cent defence spending, or ever take the tough decisions necessary to bring down the national debt?'
Behind the scenes, cabinet ministers are frustrated at the lack of a political narrative from a 'tin-eared' No 10 and believe many of the U-turns could have been avoided with better messaging. They also fear Starmer has squandered his first year and not made the most of the advantages of having a majority of 174, including making greater inroads into public-sector reform.
This will be seen as an even greater lost opportunity if the summer is plagued with record migrant crossings in the Channel and the country is hit by a new wave of graduate unemployment — widely regarded as the next big crisis looming over the government.
'The welfare reforms could have been sold better to MPs if we had made better the argument that it was about making people's lives better through work rather than through the prism of saving money in order to meet Rachel's [Reeves] fiscal rules,' one minister said.
Another government source blamed the timing of the welfare changes, which were announced a week before the spring statement, and said that in future any such reforms should be 'disentangled' from a fiscal event.
There is also a fear that despite extensive efforts by McSweeney to ensure that the 2024 intake of new Labour MPs were Starmer loyalists, too many appear to have delusions of grandeur and a lack of respect for the two men who ultimately got them elected.
'One of my colleagues described it as main character syndrome,' one MP said. 'These complaints about the prime minister not talking to new MPs — well he's a bit f***ing busy talking to President Trump.'
These sentiments are echoed by senior advisers in Starmer's government, who have watched the antics of backbench MPs with a mixture of contempt and incredulity.
'I think there are a lot of [new MPs] who worked in the charity sector who think they are really important,' one said. 'There's no respect for a leader who has worked incredibly hard to fix the party and who got them elected just 12 months ago.'
While few MPs are actively talking about replacing Starmer as prime minister, the chatter is growing that he will not lead the party into the next election. Angela Rayner, Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood are among those thought to have leadership ambitions.
One minister said: 'Very few of the MPs who signed the reasoned amendment were doing so because they wanted to see regime change, but the events of the last week have certainly emboldened those who do.'
In an effort to further quell the dissent among the back benches, Starmer said fixing the 'broken' welfare system must be done in a 'Labour way'.
'We cannot take away the safety net that vulnerable people rely on, and we won't, but we also can't let it become a snare for those who can and want to work,' the prime minister told the Welsh Labour conference on Saturday.
'Everyone agrees that our welfare system is broken: failing people every day, a generation of young people written off for good and the cost spiralling out of control. Fixing it is a moral imperative, but we need to do it in a Labour way.'
Whether these assurances are enough for Tidball, who was left upset by the chancellor last week, remains to be seen. She said: 'The concessions they have now announced are significant, including that all recipients of PIP who currently receive it will continue to do so. I know this will be an enormous relief for many of my nearly 6,000 constituents in receipt of PIP and disabled people across the country.
'However, I will continue working as I have done from the beginning, to look at these concessions carefully against the evidence on the impact upon disabled people … Fundamentally, I will be looking for further reassurances that the detail will fulfil Labour's manifesto commitments to disabled people.'
July 2024: Victory Having just returned from Buckingham Palace, Sir Keir Starmer stood outside No 10 to give his first speech as prime minister, promising to deliver the 'change' the country had voted for and 'a return of politics to public service'.
July 2024: Winter fuel payment cutOn July 29, Rachel Reeves announced she would remove the benefit from about ten million pensioners as part of her cost-cutting exercise to plug a much-contested £22 billion 'black hole' left by the Conservatives. After months of backlash and political pain, the prime minister U-turned on May 21 this year and announced the policy would be largely reversed.
September 2024: FreebiesThe Sunday Times revealed that Labour donor Lord Alli had been given a pass to No 10. This led to reporting on clothes and gifts he donated to Starmer, his wife and cabinet ministers — resulting in the prime minister, Reeves and Angela Rayner saying they would no longer accept similar donations.
October 2024: National insurance risesOn October 30, Reeves unveiled a £25 billion-a-year rise in employers' national insurance contributions and removed full inheritance tax relief on farmers, restricting it to the first £1 million of combined agricultural and business property.
June 14, 2025: Grooming inquiryStarmer spent six months resisting calls for a national grooming inquiry after the debate around the scandal was reignited by Elon Musk on social media. On June 14 he U-turned and announced an inquiry after all, days before a government-commissioned review was due to recommend it.
June 26, 2025: Welfare billOn March 18 the government announced major reforms to the benefits system that would have resulted in cuts to payments to hundreds of thousands of disabled people. More than 120 Labour MPs threatened to vote against the bill and after weeks of digging in, Downing Street caved and announced major concessions on Thursday evening.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Streeting condemns anti-IDF chants at Glastonbury but says ‘Israel should get its own house in order'
Streeting condemns anti-IDF chants at Glastonbury but says ‘Israel should get its own house in order'

The Guardian

time37 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

Streeting condemns anti-IDF chants at Glastonbury but says ‘Israel should get its own house in order'

Chants of death to the Israeli military at Glastonbury were 'appalling' and the BBC and the festival have questions to answer, Wes Streeting has said, while adding that Israel needs to 'get its own house in order'. The health secretary said the chanting should not have been broadcast to those watching at home, highlighting that Israelis at a similar music festival were kidnapped, murdered and raped. 'I thought it's appalling, to be honest, and I think the BBC and Glastonbury have got questions to answer about how we saw such a spectacle on our screens,' he told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips on Sky News. 'But I also think it's a pretty shameless publicity stunt, which I don't really want to give too much indulgence to for that reason.' He also had strong words for Israel, which has condemned the chanting. Streeting said what people should be talking about in the context of Israel and Gaza is the humanitarian catastrophe in the territory and the fact that Israeli settlers attacked a Christian village in the West Bank this week. 'All life is sacred. And I find it pretty revolting we've got to a state in this conflict where you're supposed to sort of cheer on one side or the other like it's a football team,' he said. Asked about the Israel embassy's response to the chants at Glastonbury, he said: 'Well, I'd say sort of two things in response to those words from the Israeli embassy. Firstly, I do think that if I take the equivalent of the war in Ukraine, I'm unequivocal about which side of that war I'm on. I want Ukraine to win. Would I be celebrating or chanting for the death of Russian soldiers? No, I want to see an end to the war, and I want to see an end to the conflict. 'I'd also say to the Israeli embassy, get your own house in order in terms of the conduct of your own citizens and the settlers in the West Bank. So, you know, I think there's a serious point there by the Israeli embassy I take seriously. I wish they'd take the violence of their own citizens towards Palestinians more seriously.' Police are examining videos of comments made by the acts Bob Vylan and Kneecap at Glastonbury as the festival enters its third day. On Saturday the rapper Bobby Vylan, of the rap punk duo Bob Vylan, led crowds at the festival's West Holts stage in chants of 'Free, free Palestine' and 'Death, death to the IDF [Israel Defense Forces]'. Describing himself as a 'violent punk', he said: 'Sometimes we have to get our message across with violence because that's the only language some people speak, unfortunately.' Glastonbury organisers said on Sunday that the act had crossed a line. 'With almost 4,000 performances at Glastonbury 2025, there will inevitably be artists and speakers appearing on our stages whose views we do not share, and a performer's presence here should never be seen as a tacit endorsement of their opinions and beliefs,' the festival said in a statement. 'However, we are appalled by the statements made from the West Holts stage by Bob Vylan yesterday. 'Their chants very much crossed a line and we are urgently reminding everyone involved in the production of the festival that there is no place at Glastonbury for antisemitism, hate speech or incitement to violence.' Bob Vylan performed before the Irish rap trio Kneecap, who called on fans to show up at Westminster magistrates to support the band member Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh, known as Mo Chara, who was charged with a terrorism offence for holding a Hezbollah flag at a London gig last November. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Ó hAnnaidh told the crowd on Saturday: 'Glastonbury, I'm a free man!' He added: 'If anybody falls down, you've got to pick them up. We've got to keep each other safe.' He thanked the Eavis family, the festival's organisers, for 'holding strong' and allowing their performance to go ahead. Avon and Somerset police said: 'We are aware of the comments made by acts on the West Holts stage at Glastonbury festival this afternoon. Video evidence will be assessed by officers to determine whether any offences may have been committed that would require a criminal investigation.' The Israeli embassy said it was 'deeply disturbed by the inflammatory and hateful rhetoric expressed on stage at the Glastonbury festival'. A statement on X said: 'Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of democracy. But when speech crosses into incitement, hatred, and advocacy of ethnic cleansing, it must be called out – especially when amplified by public figures on prominent platforms. 'Chants such as 'Death to the IDF,' and 'From the river to the sea' are slogans that advocate for the dismantling of the state of Israel and implicitly call for the elimination of Jewish self-determination. When such messages are delivered before tens of thousands of festivalgoers and met with applause, it raises serious concerns about the normalisation of extremist language and the glorification of violence. 'We call on Glastonbury festival organisers, artists, and public leaders in the UK to denounce this rhetoric and reject of all forms of hatred.' Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative party leader, called the scenes 'grotesque', and said: 'Glorifying violence against Jews isn't edgy. The west is playing with fire if we allow this sort of behaviour to go unchecked.' Asked about the controversy ahead of Kneecap's performance on Wednesday, Emily Eavis said: 'There have been a lot of really heated topics this year, but we remain a platform for many, many artists from all over the world and, you know, everyone is welcome here.'

Albanian burglar with almost 50 convictions wins the right to stay in the UK as 'his crimes weren't extreme enough to "revolt" the public'
Albanian burglar with almost 50 convictions wins the right to stay in the UK as 'his crimes weren't extreme enough to "revolt" the public'

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Albanian burglar with almost 50 convictions wins the right to stay in the UK as 'his crimes weren't extreme enough to "revolt" the public'

An Albanian burglar with nearly 50 convictions has won the right to stay in the UK as 'his crimes were not extreme enough to "revolt" the public'. Zenel Beshi has been dubbed a 'genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat' to the UK by the Home Office, which said he should be deported. But upper immigration tribunal judge Leonie Hirst found his crimes were not of the 'very extreme' type that would cause 'deep public revulsion' - and let him stay. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the ruling was 'out of touch' as Beshi is 'clearly a danger to the British public', The Telegraph reports. 'It's time these judges started to prioritise protecting law-abiding British citizens instead of foreign criminals', he said. Mr Philp added foreign criminals, no matter where their crime was committed, should all be sent back to their country of origin, 'no ifs, no buts'. It comes as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper proposes to change the law to make it harder to allow foreign citizens to stay in the UK on a human rights claim. Her suggested scheme would oblige judges to consider public safety more in such decisions. Beshi came to the UK in August 2020 - three years after he received a six-year prison sentence in Turin, Italy. As well as robbery and false imprisonment, he had been jailed for 44 counts of burglary and theft. But he failed to disclose his previous convictions upon his arrival in Britain. The Albanian applied for a European Economic Area (EEA) residence card, on the grounds he was a spouse of an EEA national. He was granted this, after his application was initially refused and he appealed. While he waited to hear back on this appeal, he applied for leave to remain under the EU Settlement Scheme. The Home Office, though, decided to deport him as a threat to the British public. Beshi appealed, which was upheld by a first tier tribunal, after a psychologist said he did not in fact constitute a 'serious threat' to society. They also said he posed a 'low risk' of reoffending. Ms Cooper appealed this decision - but an upper tribunal has now found Beshi not disclosing his previous convictions is of 'little relevance'. Judge Hirst said the deportation threshold and notions of rehabilitation had been applied correctly. She also lauded the legal arguments behind the decision to allow Beshi to stay as 'detailed, clear and well-structured'. The judge found there was no legal mistake to require overturning the decision - and allowed the criminal to remain. Almost half of Brits have no confidence that the police will show up if their home was burgled, a poll revealed earlier this year. Some 46 per cent of adults said they did not believe a home burglary would be properly investigated, with 49 per cent saying the same for car thefts. When looking at pensioners, with 54 per cent of those aged 65 or older expressing a lack of confidence in officers attending their property. And fears are not unjustified, as police failed to solve 94 per cent of burglary cases in 2023/24, according to Home Office figures. Just 16,912 (six per cent) of 266,215 recorded burglaries resulted in a charge. In nearly three-quarters of cases police officers were unable to even identify a suspect, and a further 15 per cent ran into evidential difficulties after a suspect was identified. Reported burglaries have fallen in the past decade, from around 444,000 in 2013/14 to the more than 266,000 in 2023/24. Meanwhile, 13 per cent of people move house because they cannot bear to stay in their home after it has been burgled. A similar proportion have said they are unable to stand being home alone after their house has been invaded. A Home Office spokesperson has previously said: 'We do not agree with this judgment and are considering options for appeal. 'Foreign nationals who commit crime should be in no doubt that we will do everything to make sure they are not free on Britain's streets, including removal from the UK at the earliest opportunity.'

Industrial firms to face £685m property tax hit after energy support pledge
Industrial firms to face £685m property tax hit after energy support pledge

North Wales Chronicle

timean hour ago

  • North Wales Chronicle

Industrial firms to face £685m property tax hit after energy support pledge

Just a week after the Government's industrial strategy revealed electricity costs for about 7,000 energy-intensive businesses would be cut by scrapping green levies, estimates suggest many of the larger firms are set to see their business rates bill soar. Around 4,300 large-scale industrial properties in England – across manufacturing sectors such as automotive, aerospace and chemicals – will face a new business rates levy costing them around £685 million a year, according to tax and software firm Ryan. The levy, which comes into effect in April, is part of next year's business rates revaluation and is being used to fund tax breaks for high street retail, leisure and hospitality sectors, Ryan said. Alex Probyn, a practice leader of property tax at Ryan, said that while the industrial strategy move to reduce energy bills was welcome, 'it's perverse to then ask those very same businesses to foot the bill for high street tax cuts through higher business rates from 2026, a year before the energy support will come into effect'. He added: 'If the goal is to boost UK competitiveness, we need a coherent strategy that tackles the total burden of fixed costs — not one that gives with one hand and then takes with the other.' It follows Sir Keir Starmer's 10-year industrial strategy, which includes a measure to cut bills by up to 25% to help firms compete with foreign rivals. Under the new plans, a new British Industrial Competitiveness Scheme from 2027 will cut costs by up to £40 per megawatt hour for over 7,000 manufacturing firms by exempting them from levies on bills including the renewables obligation, feed-in tariffs and the capacity market. Around 500 of the most energy-intensive firms, including the steel industry, chemicals and glass-making, will also see their network charges cut. They currently get a 60% discount through the British Industry Supercharger scheme, which will increase to 90% from 2026. But Ryan is calling for more coherence in strategy from the Government, cautioning that any benefit from lower energy bills risks being undermined by increased property taxation. UK firms already face the highest property taxes in the developed world and more than double the European Union average, according to the firm. Mr Probyn said: 'We're seeing two opposing policies rolled out simultaneously. One aims to support industry by reducing energy costs. 'The other increases a key fixed operational cost — property tax — on the very same businesses to subsidise other sectors. 'There is no coherent strategy; it's a contradiction.' A government spokesperson said: 'We are making it easier and quicker for businesses to invest and grow by cutting British industrial electricity costs with unprecedented new support which will cut electricity costs by around 20-25% for thousands of businesses. 'Our reform to the business rates system will also create a fairer business rates system that protects the high street, supports investment and levels the playing field. 'A new, permanently lower business rates in 2026 will benefit over 280,000 retail, hospitality and leisure business properties and will be sustainably funded by a new, higher rate on the 1% of most valuable business properties.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store