Comedian Rosie Jones issues four-word warning over 'terrifying' welfare changes
Comedian Rosie Jones, who has cerebral palsy, has warned 'no one is safe' from Labour's welfare cuts despite major concessions over their plans on Personal Independence Payments
Comedian Rosie Jones has warned 'no one is safe' from Labour 's welfare cuts despite major concessions over their plans.
The well-known celebrity, who has cerebral palsy, said it is 'terrifying' that ministers are 'victimising a vulnerable part of this country'. She raised concerns that current claimants of Personal Independence Payments could still end up losing the benefit when they are reassessed.
Speaking about Labour's newly announced protections for current claimants, Rosie said: 'They're not thinking about the millions of people who will become disabled in the future but you are also forgetting that millions of people who are in danger are getting reassessed, which could be me, so no one is safe.'
She added that she has always been a Labour voter but that this Government was been "incredibly disappointing". "This is not a Labour government that I recognise. I voted for them because I truly believed that they were the government that cared about individuals," she said.
"That's not what I'm seeing from the government right now. They care more about stats. They care more about looking good, but they're looking good by victimising a vulnerable part of this country. They're putting lives in danger, and that is terrifying."
Asked if she was reassured the Government's review would put disabled people at the heart of it, Rosie told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg: "I think disabled people should have been at the heart of the matter from the beginning.
"They were never considering the real effect that this would have on us, and I have seen no evidence that they genuinely care for disabled people and our future. So I want to believe them, but so far they're not giving me any evidence to say they will do exactly that."
Last week Keir Starmer offered significant concessions to rebel MPs to swerve a humiliating Commons defeat next week. Leading rebels told The Mirror"serious progress" had been made in crisis talks with No10 over cuts impacting hundreds of thousands of disabled people.
Changes to PIP and the health element of Universal Credit will now apply only to new claimants. It means around 370,000 people will avoid losing around £4,150-a-year. Existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will also have their incomes protected in real terms.
But campaigners said it risked "betraying the next generation of disabled people" and could create a "two-tier" system- and some Labour MPs remain opposed ahead of a Commons vote next week.
Mr Starmer today said he wished he had reached a 'better position' with Labour MPs earlier, before the major rebellion over welfare cuts erupted. In an interview with the Sunday Times, he said he was distracted by international affairs, which he admitted was not an 'excuse'. 'I'm putting this as context rather than excuse: I was heavily focused on what was happening with Nato and the Middle East all weekend,' the PM said.
Wes Streeting said he is confident the Government will win a crunch vote on welfare next week. But he admitted "we've got to listen" if further concessions on PIP were demanded.
Former Cabinet minister Louise Haigh said it was "really welcome" that Mr Starmer has "acknowledged that mistakes have been made'. She urged the PM to use this moment 'to reset the government's relationship with the British public'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
17 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
A Palestinian human rights group will discover on Monday whether it has won a legal challenge against the Government over decisions related to exports of military equipment to Israel amid the conflict in Gaza. Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision. Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn addressed demonstrators before the hearing began (Ben Whitley/PA) At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision. Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
