
The welfare reform vote: All you need to know
– 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.
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.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
32 minutes ago
- The Independent
MPs back proscribing direct action group Palestine Action as terror organisation
MPs have backed the Government's move to ban direct action group Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation, despite warnings it will have a 'chilling effect' on protest. Legislation passed in the Commons on Wednesday, as MPs voted 385 to 26, majority 359 in favour of proscribing the group under the Terrorism Act 2000. The motion is expected to be debated and voted on by the House of Lords on Thursday before it becomes law. If approved, it would become a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison to be a member of the direct action group or to support it. Security minister Dan Jarvis told MPs that protesters expressing support for Palestine 'have always been able to, and can continue to do so' as he urged support to ban Palestine Action. He said: 'Palestine Action is not a legitimate protest group. ' People engaged in lawful protest don't need weapons. People engaged in lawful protest do not throw smoke bombs and fire pyrotechnics around innocent members of the public. 'And people engaged in lawful protest do not cause millions of pounds of damage to national security infrastructure, including submarines and defence equipment for Nato.' Palestine Action is seeking a legal challenge against the Government's bid to proscribe it, with a hearing expected on Friday to decide whether the ban can be temporarily blocked, pending further proceedings to decide whether a legal challenge can be brought. The Government's move comes after two planes were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton on June 20 in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Five people have since been arrested on suspicion of a terror offence in relation to the incident. Mr Jarvis said the attack at RAF Brize Norton 'was just the latest episode in Palestine Action's long history of harmful activity', adding: 'Palestine Action has orchestrated a nation-wide campaign of property damage featuring attacks that have resulted in serious damage to property and crossed the threshold from direct criminal action into terrorism.' But the minister faced backlash from some MPs who described the move as a 'draconian overreach' and likened the group to the Suffragettes. The United Nations also warned ahead of the vote for the UK not to proscribe Palestine Action, as experts are concerned at the 'unjustified labelling of a political protest movement as 'terrorist'.' Independent MP for Coventry South Zarah Sultana also told the Commons: 'To equate a spray can of paint with a suicide bomb isn't just absurd, it is grotesque. 'It is a deliberate distortion of the law to chill dissent, criminalise solidarity and suppress the truth.' Former soldier Clive Lewis, now the Labour MP for Norwich South, said: 'I understand what terrorism is. I was in London on July 7 in 2007 and I watched my community, this city, attacked by real terrorists. 'And at that point, rightly or wrongly, I decided I was going to Afghanistan to fight the terrorists. 'And I went because I love this country, and I love our democracy, and I want to see it protected. I think today's proscription order against Palestine Action undermines that and I wish my Government wouldn't do it.' A spokesperson for Palestine Action said: 'We are confident that this unlawful order will be overturned. 'As United Nations experts have made clear, spraying red paint and disrupting the British-based operations of Israel's largest weapons firm, Elbit Systems, is not terrorism.' Outside of Parliament, four protesters were arrested by the Metropolitan Police following a demonstration to oppose the move to ban Palestine Action. The police had imposed Public Order Act conditions aimed at limiting the protest to Richmond Terrace, off Whitehall. One woman, who identified herself as Emma Kamio to the PA news agency, appeared to use the protest technique known as 'locking on' to cause an obstruction outside of Carriage Gates, one of the entrances to the parliamentary estate. Her daughter Leona Kamio was among a group of pro-Palestine protesters who have appeared in court to deny breaking into the UK site of an Israel-based defence firm with sledgehammers, causing £1 million of damage. Police were seen speaking to Ms Kamio as she sat on the pavement outside Parliament with her arm inside what appeared to be a suitcase. Listing the four arrests, a Met spokesperson said a woman 'who locked herself onto a suitcase outside the gates of Parliament' was among them for 'breaching the conditions and for being in possession of articles intended for locking on'. Among those arrested was also a 'man who blocked the gates of Downing Street with his mobility scooter and refused to move to the conditioned area'. A larger than usual number of officers could be seen in the area around Parliament. The Met said the 'significant policing presence in the vicinity of Parliament' was because of its 'responsibility to take action to prevent serious disruption to the life of the community', including by ensuring MPs 'can go about their business free from intimidation or unreasonable interference'. The legislation approved by MPs also bans two white supremacist groups, Maniacs Murder Cult and Russian Imperial Movement, including its paramilitary arm Russian Imperial Legion. The Home Office describes the Maniacs Murder Cult as a neo-Nazi transnational and online organisation which has claimed a number of violent attacks around the world. Russian Imperial Movement is a ethno-nationalist group which aims to create a new Russian Imperial State. Its paramilitary unit fought alongside Russian forces in the invasion of Ukraine to advance its ideological cause. It also runs a paramilitary training programme to support attendees to carry out terror attacks, the Home Office added.

Leader Live
35 minutes ago
- Leader Live
MPs back foreign investors owning minority stakes in UK newspapers
The Commons voted overwhelmingly in favour of a change to the law by Labour which would allow foreign firms to buy minority stakes. It is the latest turn in a tumultuous two-year takeover process for the 170-year-old newspaper business. It comes after the previous Conservative government put a block in place amid fears the Telegraph could be bought by a majority-owned UAE company, RedBird IMI. The investment vehicle is a joint venture with US financiers. The regulation was approved by 338 votes to 79, majority 259. Labour was boosted in the voting lobbies by four Reform UK MPs, including its leader Nigel Farage (Clacton), and seven Independent MPs. Meanwhile former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, a vocal critic of China, was among those to vote against it. The Liberal Democrats, who forced the vote over fears foreign ownership would compromise editorial independence, also opposed it. The result will give the green light to RedBird IMI, with the cap in place now being supported by MPs. RedBird Capital, the US junior partner in RedBird IMI, agreed a deal in May to buy a majority stake in the newspaper for £500 million. Abu-Dhabi's IMI will look to buy a minority stake as part of the consortium. RedBird has investments in AC Milan, film production giant Skydance and Liverpool FC owner Fenway Sports Group. It is also understood that the Daily Mail and General Trust (DMGT) – which owns the Daily Mail, Mail on Sunday, the i, and the Metro – is also looking to buy a stake. This is in addition to Sir Len Blavatnik, who owns the Theatre Royal Haymarket in the West End, who is considering a minority stake, according to Sky News reports. The rules were introduced after RedBird IMI looked to buy the Telegraph Media Group (TMG) from the Barclay Brothers. Then-Conservative culture secretary Lucy Frazer told a Society of Editors Conference in April 2024: 'I had concerns about the potential impacts of this deal on free expression and accurate presentation of news and that's why I issued a public interest intervention.' Culture minister Stephanie Peacock told MPs last month that appropriate safeguards had been introduced. She said: 'Government need to balance the importance of creating certainty and sustainability for our newspaper industry with the need to protect against the risk of foreign state influence by setting a clear threshold for exceptions within the regime at 15%. We believe that we have done that effectively.' Speaking after the vote, the Liberal Democrats' spokesman on media Max Wilkinson said: 'Freedom of the press is an historic and inviolable cornerstone of our democracy. That the Government is pushing to sell off stakes in our British papers to foreign governments is astonishing. 'It's outrageous that Labour and the Conservative MPs failed to stand up, do their patriotic duty and block this legislation. The leader of the opposition sponsored the Bill that restricted foreign states owning British newspapers last year – yet even she failed to vote against the measure. 'Liberal Democrats have already successfully forced the Government to backtrack on their senseless plan to let multiple states club together to buy whatever sized stake in a British outlet they fancied. Now my colleagues in the Lords and I will deliver a showdown to overturn this Bill entirely – rallying Conservative and crossbench peers to defeat the Government on this misguided policy.' The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has been approached for comment.

Leader Live
36 minutes ago
- Leader Live
‘Certain inevitability' to Grangemouth closure when Labour won power
Michael Shanks said the UK Government 'did not take any option off the table' when asked about whether Scotland's last oil refinery could have been nationalised. But he said the plant was 'far too far down the line' for the outcome to have been averted. The plant ceased crude oil processing in April, with its closure causing the loss of 430 jobs. The SNP had previously called for the UK Government to nationalise the site, which its owners said was losing £385,000 a day. Appearing before the Scottish Affairs Committee in the Commons on Wednesday, Mr Shanks, who is the MP for Rutherglen and Hamilton West, said the Government is 'not in the business of nationalising failing businesses'. However, he also described Grangemouth currently as a 'hugely investable opportunity' for businesses. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer previously announced £200 million in funding for the future of the site, cash which he hopes to triple in private investment. That came after the Scottish Government had announced £25 million in funding, while both governments funded Project Willow – a £1.5 million report into future options to keep the plant open. We're questioning Energy Minister @MGShanks on the future of North Sea energy as part of our inquiry into GB Energy and the net zero transition. Watch live ⬇️ — Scottish Affairs Committee (@CommonsScotAffs) July 2, 2025 Asked about whether the UK Government considered bringing Grangemouth into public ownership, Mr Shanks told MPs: 'I think it is fair to say we didn't take any option off the table and we did look at a whole series of options. 'But firstly, the Government's not in the business of nationalising failing businesses. 'That is difficult to say, but it is the reality that a business that's losing tens of millions of pounds, it can't be nationalised with the public facing the cost of that. 'That's the same position we're in with the Prax Lindsey refinery (North Lincolnshire), and it's the same position with Grangemouth.' Mr Shanks said Labour 'moved every possible option forward' to do what it could to save the refinery, but added: 'The truth is, we were far too far down the line with the Grangemouth process to really change the outcome and as regrettable as that is, and it genuinely is, and I've met the workers on a number of occasions, I know how significant the impact is on them and their families, there was a certain inevitability about the outcome by the point in which we came into Government.'