The calamitous day that leaves Starmer's reputation in tatters

Telegraph

3 days ago

There was a hush in the Commons as Sir Stephen Timms stood up at the despatch box to make what proved to be a monumental announcement.
The minister – one of the most mild-mannered in the House – interrupted a Labour MP speaking in the long and uncomfortable debate on welfare cuts, to reveal the Government had 'heard' MPs' concerns and would drop yet another part of its Bill.
The screeching about-turn came just hours after Liz Kendall, the embattled Work and Pensions Secretary, had vowed that no more concessions would be made.
And yet the concession announced by Sir Stephen – that the cuts to personal independence payments (PIP) would be delayed – effectively rendered the whole Bill pointless.
As leading rebel Rachael Maskell crowed: 'There is hardly a Bill left to oppose.'
All seem agreed that the calamitous day in Parliament leaves Sir Keir Starmer's reputation for competence in tatters.
On Tuesday morning, just hours before the vote, he held a back-slapping Cabinet meeting to celebrate Labour's first year in office, a milestone it will reach on Saturday.
He used the event to castigate ministers briefing against Morgan McSweeney, his chief of staff.
The day's events also raise huge questions about whether Ms Kendall will be able to stay in post, after having presided over such a disastrous piece of legislation.
Opening the debate at 1.45pm, she was defiant, saying: 'Unlike the previous administration, this government must not and will not duck the big challenges facing this country. Because the people we are in politics to serve deserve so much better than this.'
She had no intention of giving way, just days after she had been forced to make major concessions to her Bill after 127 backbenchers signed a motion against it and one government whip resigned.
These changes included exempting existing PIP claimants from any cuts to their benefits.
It had been thought that that had staved off defeat, but over the weekend, it emerged that rebels still had concerns.
On Monday, MPs were angered once more when the Government admitted that even its watered-down reforms would push 150,000 into poverty. The rebellion was back on.
In a sign that things were not going to go so well, Ms Kendall was jeered by MPs when she made her opening statement.
Throughout the debate, the drumbeat of opposition grew, with Labour backbencher after Labour backbencher lining up to criticise the Bill or calling for it to be withdrawn altogether.
Soon, there were rumours of a climbdown, as ministers accepted the inevitable lesson from the way the debate was going.
Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, was meeting rebels in her Commons offices to thrash out a deal.
Rebels wanted the government to pull the entire legislation, but they were prepared to accept changes so large that they effectively meant a neutering of the Bill.
Ms Rayner offered to delay the introduction of tightened eligibility for PIPs from the planned date of November 2026 until after a review of the future of the whole benefits system – raising the prospect that the change may never come into effect.
It was just after 4.20pm that the minister broke into a Labour MP's speech to make his dramatic announcement.
'Others across the House during this debate have raised concerns that the changes to PIP are coming ahead of the conclusions of the review of the assessment that I will be leading,' he said.
'We've heard those concerns and that is why I can announce that we are going to remove the Clause Five from the Bill at committee, that we will move straight to the wider review, sometimes referred to as the Timms Review and only make changes to PIP eligibility activity and descriptors following that review.'
A prominent Labour rebel said: 'Ministers on the front bench just lowered their heads as backbenchers looked over.'
The debate then continued for another two and a half hours, with little sign that even this concession had appeased backbenchers.
The Conservatives were jubilant, glad to see that the chaotic votes seen under the premierships of Baroness May and Liz Truss were now happening to Labour.
Simon Hoare, a former Tory minister, said the confusion felt in the House of Commons 'is now being felt and expressed in the country at large'.
He told the Commons: 'I have never seen a Bill butchered and filleted by their own sponsoring ministers in such a cack-handed way.
'Nobody can understand the purpose of this Bill now. In the interest of fairness, simplicity and natural justice, is it not best to withdraw it, redraft it and start again?'
Labour's Ian Lavery said: 'This is crazy, man! This is outrageous, man! This Bill isn't fit for purpose. If you have a look, it's 16 pages. I can ask the Right Honourable gentleman to rip the ones out that's changed. There would only be two pages left. Withdraw the Bill!'
Sir Stephen, winding up, described the debate with understatement as having been a 'passionate and eventful'.
Sitting next to him was Ms Kendall, dressed in dark garb as if for her own funeral.
Outside the chamber, Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, was seen looking even more miserable than usual. The U-turn overturns her plans to find savings worth billions.
Westminster insiders pointed out that the Work and Pensions Secretary had been a special adviser to Harriet Harman in 1998, when she was forced to resign from the same job.
Then known as social security secretary, she took unpopular proposals to slash single-parent benefits through the Commons despite a rebellion of 47 Labour MPs – two short of the rebellion suffered by Sir Keir.
Soon after, Ms Harman was sacked by Sir Tony Blair. Critics were left wondering whether Ms Kendall may now be on the verge of suffering the same fate.