Starmer shifts welfare cuts to new applicants only, in bid to avert Labour rebellion
UK prime minister
Keir Starmer
sharply scaled back planned welfare cuts on Friday to quell a rebellion by lawmakers in his governing
Labour Party
, the latest dent in his authority just a year after winning power.
Planned changes to make it tougher to collect some disability and sickness benefits would now apply only to new applicants, while the millions of people who already rely on the benefits will no longer be affected, the government said.
More than 100 Labour MPs had publicly opposed Mr Starmer's reforms, which sought to shave £5 billion (€5.8 billion) a year off a rapidly rising welfare bill.
The revolt had meant Mr Starmer faced a potential defeat in a vote on the changes in parliament next week – a year after he won a landslide majority in a national election.
READ MORE
'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,' a spokesperson for Mr Starmer's office said.
[
Vote on Keir Starmer's disability cuts Bill faces major challenge from Labour rebels
Opens in new window
]
In a letter to MPs, work and pensions minister Liz Kendall confirmed that only new claimants would be subject to the planned tightening of eligibility.
'Our reform principles remain; to target funding for those most in need and make sure the system is sustainable for the future to support generations to come,' Ms Kendall said.
Labour MP Meg Hillier, who chairs an influential parliamentary committee and had spearheaded the efforts to water down the Bill, welcomed the government's move as 'a good and workable compromise'.
The government did not set out the cost of the change in policy. Care minister Stephen Kinnock said that details would come in the next budget, which is due in the autumn.
Ruth Curtice, chief executive of think tank Resolution Foundation and a former senior finance ministry official, said the compromise would reduce the government's savings by about £3 billion a year of the original planned £5 billion.
A spokesperson for Mr Starmer said details of the plan would be set out before the vote on Tuesday, but 'these changes will be fully funded, there will be no permanent increase in borrowing'. The spokesperson declined to comment on possible tax rises.
It was the third big U-turn for Starmer's government, following a reversal in unpopular cuts to payments to pensioners for fuel to heat homes in the winter, and a decision to hold an inquiry into the authorities' response to gangs that groomed girls for sex, after having said no such inquiry was needed.
[
Irishman Morgan McSweeney: the softly-spoken chief of staff to Keir Starmer now facing questions
Opens in new window
]
Mr Starmer has argued that Britain's disability benefits system is too costly to sustain, and makes it too difficult for people who can work to do so, by penalising them for their earnings.
Campaigners said that even if existing claimants are exempt, the changes would still harm too many people. Disability UK, a charity, said it rejected a 'two-tier system' that would deny new claimants benefits that existing claimants can receive.
'It is not a massive concession to have a benefit system where future generations of disabled people receive less support than disabled people today,' said Mikey Erhardt, the group's policy lead.
The opposition Conservative Party's work and pensions policy chief, Helen Whately, said the decision was humiliating for Mr Starmer, and represented a missed opportunity to cut the welfare bill.
'Starmer ducked the challenge – leaving taxpayers to pick up the bill,' she said in a post on X.
Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds Britain's defence budget and is set to top £100 billion by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from £65 billion now.
But the plans to cut payments to some of the most vulnerable in society have proven particularly painful for MPs in the centre-left Labour Party, which founded the state-run National Health Service and sees itself as the protector of the welfare state built after the second World War.
Despite Mr Starmer's concessions, one Labour MP, Peter Lamb, said he would still vote down the Bill 'alone' if necessary.
'To me, it's insufficient when better options have repeatedly been put forward and ignored,' Mr Lamb said on X. – Reuters
(c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
New York Times and ‘Germany's Wordle' owner seek to reschedule UK trademark hearing on Wordle
The New York Times , owners of the vocabulary game Wordle, and the owner of 'Germany's Wordle' are seeking to reschedule their October UK trademark hearing. The hearing was originally booked for October 10th, but according to the UK Intellectual Property Office the parties have requested a different date, which is currently expected to be later this year. Wordle was developed in 2021 by Josh Wardle and became popular during the Covid-19 pandemic. The New York Times subsequently purchased the game in 2022 for an undisclosed low seven-figure sum. READ MORE The UK hearing is part of a long-running dispute between the New York Times and Stefan Heine, a Hamburg-based puzzle maker, over trademark rights to the name Wordle. According to a court filing by the US newspaper, immediately after it was publicised that the New York Times had 'acquired the rights to the [Wordle] game and the mark', Mr Heine filed a trademark application in Germany, the rights to which were secured on February 1st, 2022. [ Róisín Ingle: I have a great Wordle start word – it's just a bit rude Opens in new window ] According to the New York Times filing, 'he then followed that with a flurry of international trademark application designations for Wordle ... in Norway, Switzerland, [with] the EUIPO [the European Intellectual Property Office], and the UK, … [with] no lawful basis'. These moves were met with legal measures in the various jurisdictions by the New York Times, which in turn are being contested by Mr Heine, according to the newspaper's filing. In July 2023, the New York Times applied to register the trademark for Wordle in the UK, and in August of that year it filed an invalidation action against Mr Heine's UK Wordle trademark registration. The newspaper claimed that Mr Heine's registration should be cancelled due to a risk of passing off. This is based on the New York Times' claimed use of the word Wordle throughout the UK since June 2021. It is also claimed that Mr Heine's Wordle trademark was applied for in 'bad faith'. In November 2023, Mr Heine opposed the New York Times' trademark application on the basis of his earlier trademark application in August 2022, which was protected in December 2022. The Hamburg puzzle maker also claims a priority filing date of February 1st, 2022, from his German Wordle trademark registration. Meanwhile, the New York Times claimed that on January 31st, 2022, it acquired all of Mr Wardle's rights in the Wordle game and its trademark, which the US paper claimed Mr Wardle created 'around January 2021'. The newspaper is also claiming that by February 1st, 2022, Wordle was a 'well-known trademark' as per the UK legislation and the Paris Convention. A spokesperson for the New York Times confirmed that the paper is opposing the registration of the UK trademark for Mr Heine's Wordle 'as part of our standard IP protection efforts, because we think it is likely to cause confusion among consumers about the source of the mark'. The legal representatives for Mr Heine – Murgitroyd & Company – said that as the cases were ongoing they were unable to comment 'as we are keen not to prejudice our client's case'.
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Omagh bombing inquiry: bereaved families' long-standing quest for truth collides with reality
For those bereaved and injured in the August 1998 Omagh bombing , the inquiry into the atrocity brought hope that, finally, they might get answers. Could the UK authorities have prevented the bombing by Real IRA dissidents that killed 29 people including a woman who was pregnant with twins on a sunny Saturday afternoon? This week, that hope collided with reality. Over two days of opening statements, the inquiry heard from the UK government and Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) on the logistical challenges they faced in providing documents and exhibits to the inquiry. READ MORE The slow pace of disclosure has led to an 'unfortunate' gap of nine months, as lawyer to the inquiry, Paul Greaney KC, put it; the inquiry cannot now begin considering the bombing itself until March 2026, almost two years after it opened. Michael Mansfield KC, representing the family of one of the victims, 57-year-old mother of three Libby Rush, cut to the chase. 'It cannot be said that government departments were not on notice,' he said. 'Once this happened on the 15th August, 1998, are we to imagine that state authorities didn't immediately have meetings ... which should have ensured the preservation [of materials] – not 'Oh, we only got notice yesterday'.' In fairness, the task facing them is not inconsiderable. The PSNI has so far made ready 26,000 documents and 2,000 exhibits and reassigned staff. This is a body that is so pushed for resources that earlier this month 24 police officers were reallocated from tackling domestic violence and sexual abuse to deal with public disorder. [ The stories of the Omagh bomb victims Opens in new window ] Both its barrister and that representing the UK government repeatedly stressed their commitment to assisting the inquiry. None of their explanations, Philip Henry KC said for the PSNI, were an excuse but rather 'a candid explanation of what is involved, so that expectations are realistic'. Yet the difficulties continued. It emerged that a document said to be missing, then destroyed, was subsequently found. The inquiry chairman, Lord Turnbull, echoed families' concerns 'over statements made by state bodies about apparent inability to locate relevant documents' and warned any such assertions would be subject to 'the most rigorous scrutiny'. Lord Turnbull. Photograph: Northern Ireland Office/PA Wire There were concerns, too, around sensitive material and how this will be approached, particularly given the relevance of intelligence, including warnings said to have been passed on by an alleged British agent, to the answers the inquiry is seeking. Last month it emerged a 'considerable body of material' had not been shared with the inquiry because of applications by the UK government and the PSNI to redact information. This, said barrister Stephen Toal KC, representing the families of five of those killed, 'speaks to a defensive instinct, not a transparent one.' Just ask the family of Seán Brown. The GAA official was abducted and murdered by loyalists in Bellaghy, Co Derry, in 1997, the year before the Omagh bombing. The UK government is currently challenging a court ruling that it must hold a public inquiry into his killing. That the Omagh investigation is happening at all is the result of decades of campaigns and courtroom battles, not least by Michael Gallagher, whose 21-year-old son, Aiden, was among the victims. He brought the judicial review which resulted in the High Court judgment ordering the UK government to set up the inquiry. [ Omagh inquiry: Father of victim describes toll taken by years of campaigning for justice Opens in new window ] That same judge also recommended a similar inquiry south of the Border. The Irish Government was repeatedly criticised this week for failing to do so, though Lord Turnbull said he took the repeated assurances he had received about Dublin's commitment to assisting the inquiry 'in good faith'. Alan Kane KC quoted the future taoiseach Enda Kenny in the Dáil in 2004: 'You will get your truth, and so will Ireland.' 'Talk is cheap,' said Toal of both governments. 'They make warm statements about solidarity, but these families have learned to measure words against deeds.' As Lord Turnbull observed, some of those listening to the proceedings 'may have been thinking to themselves that if the various secretaries of state and other ministers involved had not so staunchly set their face against a public inquiry over the very many years and very many times that such requests were made, the problems now being grappled with would not be so acute.' Yet, he said: 'We are where we are.' Where we are is that the legacy of the North's Troubles still has not been dealt with, and the Omagh inquiry goes to the heart of one of its enduring tensions, the interests of national security versus the rights of individuals to life, to justice and to truth. The bereaved and injured have already suffered through decades of delay, obstruction and denial, broken promises, frustration heaped on devastation, and it is clear this inquiry will be a lengthy and complex one. States will always seek to protect their secrets, but a way must be found to balance these interests with the 'moral imperative', as one family barrister put it, to provide the answers which have been so desperately sought by so many, for so long. This is the reality; ultimately the hope, said Michael Mansfield, representing the Rush family, is that 'this public inquiry represents the beginning of the end of the story of the Omagh bombing'.
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
Senator George Mitchell: The man Ian Paisley called ‘a foreigner and a pro-Irish republican'
In the months after the signing of the Belfast Agreement in April 1998, a letter arrived in the morning post at the homes of more than a few journalists in Ireland and Britain. It was an unusual one. I was one of those to receive it – a personal note of thanks from former US senator George Mitchell , the man who had chaired the years of tortuous negotiations in Stormont. In it, he said he deeply appreciated the role the press plays, particularly in a divided society. I was struck by his decision to pen letters to the same reporters who had questioned him, his motivations and his handling of the talks at every turn. This was so especially given that by then he was back home in New York with his wife and young son and could have been forgiven for never wanting to think about Northern Ireland , its people or its politicians ever again. We were used to dealing with stuffy, aloof British government ministers sent to Belfast , often as a punishment. But Mitchell was cut from a different cloth, always approachable, open, interested. READ MORE Agreement in Northern Ireland did not come overnight. It took many painful months and years. But George Mitchell stuck at it, keeping the negotiators at the table, despite the violence that continued on the streets. Photograph: Jan McCullough George Mitchell filming in his home town of Waterville, Maine. Photograph: Jan McCullough When he and his wife, Heather, returned to Belfast in April 2023 for the 25th anniversary of the Belfast Agreement, he stole the show at an event at Queen's University, even in the presence of Tony Blair, Bill Clinton and others. [ 'A handful of hopefuls can create change': George Mitchell passes on the torch to a new generation Opens in new window ] His words that day were typical of the man from Maine. He celebrated the achievement of the historic accord, but he also implored everyone to do more, to continue to build on the peace, not to take it for granted. I left Queen's that day not only determined to document what he had achieved while in Belfast, but to also understand what it was from his background that made him such a successful negotiator. When his son, Andrew, was born in October 1997 during one of the most fruitless chapters of the talks, one of his staff told him that 61 children had been born in Northern Ireland on the same day – children who deserved to grow up in peace. It was a thought that drove him often. He should never have been in Northern Ireland. The senator from the state of Maine had passed up an opportunity to be President Clinton's pick for the Supreme Court. In January 1995, he became Clinton's economic adviser on Northern Ireland. Having organised that year's Washington economic conference on Northern Ireland, he drafted the Mitchell Principles to help bring Sinn Féin and the loyalist parties into the talks, if they accepted exclusively peaceful means. George Mitchell with film-maker Trevor Birney (centre) and film crew in Waterville, Maine Few were surprised when he was Dublin and London's first choice to chair the talks, even if it provoked outrage from Ian Paisley in early 1996, who said the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) would quit if Mitchell arrived. 'This is about whether George Mitchell, a foreigner and a pro-Irish republican, should preside at talks that have the future destiny of Northern Ireland at hand,' the DUP leader charged. Many others were simply amazed that such a senior US figure would dedicate his time to finding a solution to a conflict deemed unfixable, where so many other efforts had failed before. That was his art, it was never about him. When we set out to make The Negotiator, it was with a desire to discover what had shaped him as a man, as a politician and as a skilled negotiator He quietly went about gaining the trust of those who would occupy Castle Buildings on Stormont's grounds for two years. Resolutions are not found in public. They are hidden in the cracks and crevices of differences. Mitchell's attention to granular detail and his ability to listen with intention allowed him to reach a deep understanding of the conflict that ultimately led to compromise and agreement. Film-maker, Trevor Birney I was one of the many journalists who gathered daily outside the gates of Castle Buildings on Stormont's grounds, attempting to find something new to say. Even though I was very junior, Mitchell and his team were always approachable and helpful as journalists sought to find where truth lay between the briefings and counter-briefings from the governments and the political parties. [ George Mitchell: Northern Ireland's peace must evolve. And if it is here to stay it must be shared Opens in new window ] Agreement did not come overnight. It took many painful months and years. But Mitchell stuck at it, keeping the negotiators at the table, despite the violence that continued on the streets. He could have issued ultimatums and deadlines. Instead, he let everyone air their grievances, day after day. People had to be heard, and to feel that they had been heard. An agreement would be written by them, not dictated by him. That was his art, it was never about him. When we set out to make The Negotiator, it was with a desire to discover what had shaped him as a man, as a politician and as a skilled negotiator. In large part, the answer was found in his home state of Maine, where he honed his political skills as a young lawyer. His mother, who could not read or write, was from Bkassine in southern Lebanon. His Boston-born father had been adopted by a Lebanese-American family. George and his four siblings had a humble childhood, living in a two-room shack by the side of the Kennebec river in Waterville. Early on, he learned that listening to others was the key. Later, as a US senator for Maine, he spent six years finding an agreement over Maine's Acadia National Park's boundaries – an issue that had caused bitter local division for 25 years: 'Patience is a muscle,' he said. Leaving Queen's at the end of the 25th anniversary celebrations, I felt that we had failed properly to document his life, and the road that brought him to Belfast despite all of the time that he had spent in the city. Before he left, I asked him whether he would take part in a documentary charting his life. Thankfully, he agreed. Over several days, we interviewed him at the Mitchells' family home on Mount Desert Island, and also in New York. [ George Mitchell says Belfast Agreement will always be a challenge Opens in new window ] There was a lot of life to cram into one film. In Northern Ireland, he had achieved something that was widely accepted as impossible – a political settlement that brought an apparently intractable conflict to an end. There are busts of him in Belfast. A Colin Davidson portrait celebrates him in New York. People still want to shake his head and tell him they had believed that he was doomed to fail, but were grateful that he had not. Today, for all its flaws, the Belfast our daughters have grown up in was gifted by those who took risks for peace in an agreement hammered out in Castle Buildings on days when there was often little hope. There were many peacemakers, but Mitchell was at the centre. His legacy stands as a beacon: conflicts can be solved if people learn to listen, to properly listen. Where patience is a muscle. The lesson, according to George Mitchell. Journalist Trevor Birney's projects have included producing the Kneecap film and writing a book and making a documentary about businessman Seán Quinn. His documentary The Negotiator was released this week.
