Starmer's welfare U-turn doesn't go far enough, warns Scottish charity
Scotland's leading advice charity has said Keir Starmer's welfare U-turn 'doesn't go anywhere near far enough'.
The UK Government confirmed on Friday that it will make major concessions to backbench Labour rebels over planned benefit reforms.
The UK Government's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill originally wanted to cut Universal Credit health top-ups for new claims from April 2026, and scrap the Work Capability Assessment (WCA).
The reforms also vowed to review Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessments and 'focus PIP on those with higher needs', while consulting on plans to delay access to the health top-up in Universal Credit until someone is aged 22.
The cuts to Universal Credit would have directly impacted benefit claimants in Scotland, while the other changes would have impacted the amount of money coming to Social Security Scotland for devolved benefits, like Adult Disability Payments, which replaced PIP for Scots.
The Scottish Government would have been responsible for making decisions about welfare and disability benefits based on its budget.
The welfare reforms sparked a major rebellion among Labour MPs at Westminster.
Ahead of a crucial vote on Tuesday, 126 backbenchers signed their names to an amendment to halt the welfare reform legislation in its tracks.
Among the rebels are nine Scottish Labour MPs.
The rebellion is large enough to wipe out Labour's working majority in Parliament, and threatens the Prime Minister with defeat when the reforms are put to a vote.
Keir Starmer originally doubled down and vowed to press ahead with his Government's proposed welfare changes, but on Friday, the work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall confirmed that the Government was U-turning on some of their reforms to appease the more than 120 rebels.
Under the concessions, Kendall said PIP claimants will continue to receive the benefits they currently get, as will recipients of the health element of universal credit.
She said the planned benefit cuts will only hit future claimants.
However, Citizens Advice Scotland has said the concessions are 'nowhere near enough'.
'Creating a two-tier system is highly problematic. It seems the UK Government's message is: you're ok if you are disabled today, but good luck if you become disabled tomorrow,' spokesperson Emma Jackson said.
The charity said it also appears that none of the issues that the reforms pose for people in Scotland have been addressed – for example, guaranteeing the passporting capacity of the adult disability payment.
Without that guarantee, Ms Jackson said 'huge uncertainty exists'.
'Social security is an investment in all of us that should act as both a safety net and springboard; enabling people to realise their potential and providing support during the challenges of life that any of us could experience,' Ms Jackson said.
'These reforms will rip gaping holes into the system that so many depend on. In a just and compassionate society, we cannot allow this to happen.
'We urge the UK Government to halt these reforms altogether and engage with meaningful consultation and co-design with disabled people.'
A spokesperson for Number 10 said: 'We have listened to MPs who support the principle of reform but are worried about the pace of change for those already supported by the system.
'This package will preserve the social security system for those who need it by putting it on a sustainable footing, provide dignity for those unable to work, supports those who can and reduce anxiety for those currently in the system.
'Our reforms are underpinned by Labour values and our determination to deliver the change the country voted for last year.'
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
16 minutes ago
- The Independent
Armenia arrests another top cleric over an alleged coup plot
Armenia has arrested a second prominent cleric on charges of plotting against the government, the latest escalation in a clampdown on outspoken critics of Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan. A court in Yerevan on Saturday ordered Archbishop Mikael Ajapahyan to be held in pre-trial detention for two months, his lawyer Ara Zohrabyan said. He said the decision was 'obviously illegal and unfounded' saying his client will appeal. State prosecutors accuse Ajapahyan of publicly calling for an armed ouster of the government. On Friday, security forces faced off with crowds at the headquarters of the Armenian Apostolic Church outside Yerevan as they tried to arrest Ajapahyan. Videos circulating on social media showed clergymen jostling with police, while bells of a nearby cathedral rang out. After Armenia's National Security Service urged Ajapahyan to appear before authorities, local media showed him entering the building of Armenia's Investigative Committee in his gray robes. 'I have never hidden and I am not going to hide now,' Ajapahyan told reporters on Friday. 'I say that what is happening now is lawlessness. I have never been and am not a threat to this country, the main threat is in the government.' Last year, tens of thousands of demonstrators called for Pashinyan's ouster after Armenia agreed to hand over control of several border villages to Azerbaijan and to normalize relations between the neighbors and bitter rivals. On Wednesday, authorities arrested Archbishop Bagrat Galstanyan, who leads the Sacred Struggle opposition movement. He was accused of plotting a sabotage campaign to overthrow Pashinyan, charges that his lawyer rejected as 'fiction.' Members of Sacred Struggle, which has bitterly opposed the handover of the border villages, accused the government of cracking down on political rights. Although the territorial concession was the movement's core issue, it has expanded to a wide array of complaints about Pashinyan, who came to power in 2018. Another vocal critic of Pashinyan, Russian-Armenian billionaire Samvel Karapetyan, was arrested last week on charges of calling for the government's overthrow, which he denied. Armenia and Azerbaijan have been locked in territorial disputes since the early 1990s, as various parts of the Soviet Union pressed for independence from Moscow. After the USSR collapsed in 1991, ethnic Armenian separatist forces backed by the Armenian military won control of Azerbaijan's region of Karabakh and nearby territories. In 2020, Azerbaijan recaptured broad swaths of territory that were held for nearly three decades by Armenian forces. A lightning military campaign in September 2023 saw Azerbaijan fully reclaim control of Karabakh, and Armenia later handed over the border villages. Pashinyan has recently sought to normalize relations with Azerbaijan. Last week, he also visited Azerbaijan's top ally, Turkey, to mend a historic rift. Turkey and Armenia have a more than century-old dispute over the deaths of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians in massacres, deportations and forced marches that began in 1915 in Ottoman Turkey. Historians widely view the event as genocide. Turkey vehemently rejects the label, conceding that many died in that era but insisting the death toll is inflated and resulted from civil unrest. Attempts to impeach Pashinyan, who came to power in 2018, were unsuccessful. Although territorial concessions were a core issue for Sacred Struggle, it has expanded to a wide array of complaints about Pashinyan as the Apostolic Church's relationship with the government deteriorated. On June 8, Pashinyan called for church leader Karekin II to resign after accusing him of fathering a child despite a vow of celibacy. The church released a statement at the time accusing Pashinyan of undermining Armenia's 'spiritual unity' but did not address the claim about the child.
Spectator
19 minutes ago
- Spectator
Starmer changes his tune on peerage rules
Sir Keir Starmer seems to be changing his mind a lot these days. Whether it is welfare cuts or the 'island of strangers' speech, a grooming gangs inquiry or winter fuel, the Prime Minister is struggling to keep consistent line on much at present. So it is perhaps no surprise then that the Labour leader has changed his tune on the rules around peerages too. In a little-noticed statement to parliament, snuck out last Thursday, Starmer provided an update on the 'roles and responsibilities of all parties involved in making nominations to the House of Lords.' He addressed the subject of the House of Lords Appointments Commission (HOLAC), saying that: Advice on propriety is separate to judgements about the suitability of candidates, which are for political parties… The Commission can decline to support a nomination on propriety grounds and will inform the relevant political party if this is the case. It is a matter for the Prime Minister to decide whether to recommend an individual to the Sovereign. In the unlikely event I, as Prime Minister, were to proceed with a nomination against HOLAC's advice on propriety I would write to the Commission and this letter would be published on The Commission may also provide advice on whether there are any presentational risks associated with a nominee. The Commission does not withhold support for a nominee due to presentational risks. Hmm. That is a somewhat different tone to the one struck by Labour in opposition. Flashback to 2020 when Labour criticised Boris Johnson's decision to overrule HOLAC and award businessman Peter Cruddas a peerage. It prompted Starmer's deputy, Angela Rayner, to declare that 'there is one rule for the Conservatives and their chums, another for the rest of the country.' Yet now that Labour is in office, it seems that Starmer is perfectly happy to overrule HOLAC if he deems it necessary… There is an intriguing sub-plot to this latest Starmer statement too. He goes on to refer to the creation of Crossbench peerages: As Prime Minister, I will continue to recommend directly for appointment a limited number of candidates to sit as Crossbench peers, based on their public service, including both distinguished public servants on retirement and individuals with a proven track record of service to the public. These nominations will continue to be vetted for propriety by the House of Lords Appointments Commission. Given Starmer's aforementioned distinction between 'propriety' and 'suitability', it does raise the question of who exactly he has in mind to sit on the Crossbenches in future…
The Guardian
35 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Disabled Labour MP says welfare U-turn would create ‘unethical two-tier system'
A disabled Labour MP has said Keir Starmer's chaotic U-turn on welfare reform will create an 'unethical two-tier system', in a damning intervention which will put further pressure on the prime minister to change course. Olivia Blake, one of only nine MPs in parliament who has a disclosed disability, said the proposed changes to the welfare bill have been 'plucked from the air' by ministers scrambling to secure support for the bill in Tuesday's crunch vote in the Commons. 'The first thing I thought when I heard the concessions was, wait, we've not taken the step back that's needed here, we're working to improve a bill which is really harmful,' she said. 'This could form an unethical two-tier system that treats two people with the exact same injury or illness differently.' Blake, who has genetic pain disorders and is neurodivergent, said she has repeatedly warned ministers and whips for months about the inadequacy of the plans, but described the process of trying to communicate with government as like 'shouting at a brick wall'. 'They will meet you and chat with you but not respond. They need to learn lessons from that.' She added: 'I'm disappointed that something has been plucked from the air without engaging disabled people.' There have been after several days of frantic negotiations by the government as ministers tried to quell a rebellion of 120-plus Labour MPs over next week's welfare bill. Under the original plans, the personal independence payments (Pip) system would have its eligibility significantly tightened while out of work sickness benefits would be cut. The work and pensions secretary, Liz Kendall, has now promised to exempt current disability claimants from the changes, and to increase the health element of universal credit in line with inflation. Blake is adamant this is not enough. 'There are other ways forward and concessions made on this bill can't lead to future claimants suffering consequences that today's claimants may be able to avoid,' she said. 'We can't kick the can down the road. We certainly can't take away the already limited support disabled people rely on, condemning many to a life of poverty and deteriorating health.' The government has promised that the entire criteria system will be reviewed in conjunction with disabled people, but there is growing resentment among disability advocates that this was not done sooner. Blake said she agrees with their anger. 'I think the government needs to listen to disabled people, starting with its own backbenchers because it's clear our voices are still locked out,' she added. Vicky Foxcroft, who has rheumatoid arthritis, resigned as a whip in protest over the bill. With so few MPs in the party having a disclosed disability, Blake is disappointed the leadership has sidelined their input. 'It's hugely frustrating especially when colleagues have been going on the media day after day [incorrectly] calling Pip an out of work benefit,' she said. 'I've tried to flag that.' Blake is also one of the few MPs who has direct experience with the disability benefits system. In 2023, she applied for Pip herself, in part to understand what her constituents are facing. 'I'm in daily pain. I have to plan around flare-ups, hospital visits, and treatments that wipe me out for days,' she said. 'Even getting to work can mean pushing through fatigue and discomfort most people never experience. Sitting in the chamber is often excruciating.' Despite this, she was rejected for Pip, scoring just 2 points overall. She said: 'I found it staggering that the only one of my conditions that scored a point was my dyslexia. 'Even though I'd sent off reams of reports, test results, appointment notes and letters, correspondence with consultants. I thought there was a deep irony that the accessible form I had requested [for my dyslexia] arrived after their own deadlines.' Blake recalls there were multiple factual errors in the report but didn't feel confident enough to appeal. 'It made me question myself, as if I'd done something wrong.' The experience left her with an understanding of what other disabled people who rely on benefits are going through. 'This is not a system designed to support, it is a system that is toxic and makes people more ill.' This is the first time Blake, who was elected in 2019, has spoken publicly about her physical disabilities. 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 She said that she has not done so lightly. 'I worry people will think it means I can't do my job effectively or as a weakness,' she said. 'But I think it makes me a better representative because I get it.' Now, that means making a plea to her colleagues: 'This isn't about us. It's not about the games in Westminster. This is about the lives of disabled people that have continuously been undervalued.'
