Concessions to welfare reforms revealed after Labour backbench rebellion forces government retreat
Changes to welfare reforms, forced on the government by rebel Labour MPs, are being revealed today ahead of a crucial vote.
The original bill restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (pip) and cut the health-related element of universal credit (UC).
The government, which insisted welfare costs were becoming unsustainable, was forced into a U-turn after 126 Labour backbenchers signed an amendment that would have halted the bill at its first Commons hurdle.
While the amendment is expected to be withdrawn, after changes that appeased some Labour MPs, others are still unhappy and considering backing a similar amendment to be tabled today.
2:59
Here are the main changes to the UC and pip bill:
• current pip claimants will keep their benefits; stricter eligibility requirements will only apply to new claims from November 2026
• a review of the pip assessment, which will have input from disabled people
• existing recipients of the health-related element of UC will have their incomes protected in real terms
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said in a statement that the legislation now aims to deliver a "fairer, more compassionate system" ahead of the second reading and vote on Tuesday.
"We must build a welfare system that provides security for those who cannot work and the right support for those who can. Too often, disabled people feel trapped, worried that if they try to work, they could lose the support they depend on.
"That is why we are taking action to remove those barriers, support disabled people to live with dignity and independence, and open routes into employment for those who want to pursue it.
"This is about delivering a fairer, more compassionate system as part of our Plan for Change which supports people to thrive, whatever their circumstances."
On Saturday, Sir Keir Starmer said fixing the UK's welfare system was a "moral imperative". The government claimed cuts to sickness and disability benefits would shave £5bn off the welfare bill and get more people into work.
The Resolution Foundation believes the concessions could cost as much as £3bn, while the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned that the changes make tax rises more likely.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting told Sky News that welfare bill changes have put Labour in a much better position ahead of tomorrow's vote.
On Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, Mr Streeting said: "There were things that we didn't get right, we've put right, and there'll be a debate about future amendments and things, I'm sure, as it goes through in the usual way."
On the same programme, shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately repeatedly refused to say whether the Conservatives would back the bill, but would review the proposals after the minister's statement later.
"We have said that if there are more savings that actually bring the welfare bill down, if they'll get more people into work, and if they commit to using the savings to avoid tax cuts in the autumn, which looks highly unlikely at the moment, then they have our support."
The Liberal Democrats plan to vote against the bill and have called for the government to speed up access-to-work decisions to help people enter the workforce.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
32 minutes ago
- Times
Food prices drive shop price inflation to highest in a year
Monthly shop price inflation rose in June for the first time since July last year, driven by higher food prices as businesses passed on rising employment costs to shoppers. Food price inflation rose to 3.7 per cent in June compared with the same period last year and against 2.8 per cent in May, according to figures collected by the British Retail Consortium and NielsenIQ. • Grocery prices rise at fastest pace in more than a year Overall shop price inflation increased to 0.4 per cent compared with June 2024 and a year-on-year decline in prices of 0.1 per cent in May. Non-food prices were 1.2 per cent lower in June compared with a year ago, a narrower decline than the 1.5 per cent recorded in May. It is the first time that overall monthly shop price inflation has risen since July 2024. Helen Dickinson, chief executive of the BRC, said shops were having to pass on higher employment costs arising from the government's tax and minimum wage changes which came into force in April. 'Within three months of the costs imposed by last autumn's budget kicking in, headline shop prices have returned to inflation for the first time in close to a year,' she said. She added that the effect of government policy on prices had been 'accelerated by geopolitical tensions and impacts of climate change'. Meat prices had been affected by high wholesale prices and more expensive labour costs, while fruit and vegetable prices increased due to hot, dry weather reducing harvest yields, she said. Higher food prices increase pressure on low-income households in the UK, who spend a relatively larger share of their monthly income on necessities. Deflation in non-food goods continued as retailers cut prices, particularly in DIY and gardening 'so customers could make the most of the sunshine', the consortium said. Dickinson called on the government to 'find ways to alleviate the cost pressures bearing down on retailers' including via business rates reform. The official overall inflation rate for the UK remained at 3.4 per cent in the year to May, the highest for more than a year and above the Bank of England's target rate of 2 per cent. Food prices are at their highest since February 2024, according to official figures. The conflict between Iran and Israel has prompted concerns that higher oil prices could fuel a fresh round of inflation.
Sky News
38 minutes ago
- Sky News
PM faces threat of major Labour rebellion as key vote on welfare reforms looms
Why you can trust Sky News Sir Keir Starmer continues to face the threat of a major rebellion during a key vote on welfare reforms later - despite making last-minute concessions to disgruntled Labour MPs. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall has confirmed that all existing claimants of the personal independence payment (PIP), the main disability benefit, will be protected from changes to eligibility. The combined value of the standard Universal Credit allowance and the health top-up will rise "at least in line with inflation" every year of this parliament. And an additional £300m for employment support for sick and disabled people in 2026 has been announced, which will rise every year after. 10:54 Ms Kendall has also promised that a consultation into PIP - "co-produced" with disabled people - will be published next autumn. She said the U-turn on welfare cuts will cost taxpayers about £2.5bn by 2030 - less than half the £4.8bn the government had expected to save with its initial proposals. Modelling by Ms Kendall's own department, released yesterday, suggested the proposals would push 150,000 more people into poverty by 2030, down from the 250,000 estimated under the original plan. But after announcing the U-turns, Labour MPs were still publicly saying they could not back the plans as they do not go far enough to allay their concerns. Disabilities minister Stephen Timms would not say he was "confident" the proposals would pass the Commons when asked on Sky News' Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge. "We've got a very strong package, I certainly hope it passes," he replied. 1:49 A total of 86 charities united yesterday to call on MPs to reject the reforms, saying they will harm disabled people and calling it "a political choice". The likes of Oxfam, Child Action Poverty Group, Mind and Shelter said the bill has been brought to a vote without consulting disabled people and without any assessment "of its impact on health and employment outcomes". When asked to name "a single" disability organisation in favour of the reforms, Ms Kendall declined to do so. Several Labour MPs indicated they would still vote against the changes, leaving the government in the dark over how big a rebellion it still may face. Ms Kendall tried to allay their fears, telling MPs: "I believe we have a fair package, a package that protects existing claimants because they've come to rely on that support." Richard Burgon presented a petition to parliament yesterday evening against the cuts, signed by more than 77,000 people. Several Labour MPs questioned why the vote was going ahead before the review into PIP is published - including Rachael Maskell, who said she could not "countenance sick and disabled people being denied support" and added: "It is a matter of conscience." Connor Naismith said the concessions "undoubtedly improve efforts to secure welfare reform which is fair", but added: "Unfortunately, I do not believe these concessions yet go far enough." Nadia Whittome accused the government of "ignoring" disabled people and urged ministers to go "back to the drawing board". Ian Byrne told the Commons he will vote against the "cruel cuts" to disability benefits because the "so-called concessions go nowhere near far enough".
Times
40 minutes ago
- Times
Times letters: BBC coverage of Glastonbury hate chants
Write to letters@ Sir, What a great many of us really find 'appalling', to use the prime minister's word to describe the nonsense spouted at a music festival by a band very few had previously heard of and even fewer will remember next week, is that he is more outspoken in his condemnation of this futile and forgettable puerility than he has ever been about the Israeli regime's killing of tens of thousands of Palestinians, including those desperately queueing for BryantLondon N16 Sir, I confess to being baffled by the criticism of the BBC for continuing to broadcast Bob Vylan at Glastonbury when the band's singer started to lead a chant of 'death to the IDF' ('BBC 'should have pulled coverage of hate chants' ', news, Jun 30). When a newsworthy event (as this clearly was) occurs during a live broadcast, surely cutting the feed is the last thing a broadcaster should do? It can hardly be interpreted as some form of SaundersLondon NW8 Sir, The call for the deaths of IDF soldiers is to be condemned — it was shameful and inexcusable. However, it was also almost to be expected given the continuing killing of Gazans by Israel, which is just as inexcusable. In his comment article ('A broadcasting failure that spread despair — and fear', Jun 30), Danny Cohen blames the BBC and the organisers of Glastonbury but omits to mention the continuing attacks on Gaza. We need to get things in WattPontyclun, Rhondda Cynon Taf Sir, It is outrageous for anyone to suggest that the BBC should censor events as they happen. The event was broadcast live; taking it off air would have given even more publicity to this evil rant. The BBC should not, under any circumstances, be a party to censorship; the honesty of its output would never be trusted again if it TrendallOverton, Hants Sir, Bobby Vylan must be thrilled that not only was his venomous chanting on stage featured on the BBC but also on the front page of several national newspapers. As a friend of many Jewish people I am horrified that this publicity was given to DavidsonLondon W4 Sir, Surely the blame for inciting violence lies squarely with the performers; the BBC and Glastonbury Festival organisers should not be held responsible for lyrics. A heavy penalty or custody might make performers think twice about what messages they intend putting HardenPenrith, Cumbria Sir, If the politicians scrambling to condemn a minor pop group at Glastonbury had stayed their outrage for a few minutes they would have seen, in the same news broadcast, the bodies of children being brought out of the rubble in Gaza, killed by . . . the CotterillSprotbrough, S Yorks Sir, The BBC has always been one of the best things about living in Britain. However, after the toxic racist-antisemitic chanting at Glastonbury, surely, at the very least, the corporation should lose its monopoly of broadcasting live from the music festival, given that it is clearly incapable of exercising that right DavisRotherfield, E Sussex Sir, Martha's Rule has become a very important factor in the improvement of NHS medical care ('Martha's Rule helps hospitals to save 129 lives in six months', Jun 30). The parents of Bethan James are also making a hugely important contribution to patient safety. It is of considerable concern that there were 2,389 calls for second opinions in the first six months of Martha's Rule and 465 led to a change in care, possibly saving life. Why were all these first opinions (more than two a day) so flawed? This is not a trivial issue: lives were saved that would otherwise have been lost. Clearly there is a systemic problem here, just as there appears to be with maternity services. As a consultant surgeon with 50 years of experience, I would suggest two reasons: first, there is a lack of continuity of care because junior doctors are bound by the European Working Time Directive to work no more than 48 hours a week. Second, the British Medical Association has become obsessed with political issues and has totally lost the plot with respect to improving medical practice and saving lives. We in the medical profession should be very grateful to the Mills and James families for striving to improve medical care in the Allum FRCSConsultant orthopaedic surgeon, Farnham Common, Bucks Sir, Further to the letters (Jun 28) from Dr Jane Philip and Catherine Sedgwick, at present it is up to general practices to triage patients for the physician associate. There appear to be no rules governing this. I have seen some anxious patients after the physician associate made an incorrect diagnosis, gave a wrong interpretation of facts or missed a serious problem, and did not ask for help from a doctor. As physician associates do not have a medical background I have seen unnecessary expensive tests ordered. None of these physician associates have had a medical school interview to assess whether they are suitable to work as a doctor, ie a character Rosemary Alexander MRCPLocum NHS GP and private doctor, London NW9 Sir, Helen Millichap, the new national lead for violence against women and girls, is welcome proof that the government is determined to meet its pledge of halving violence against women by 2030 ('Meet the Met officer leading the war on violence against women', Jun 30). Millichap's aim to develop intelligence-led tactics to target domestic abusers as well as rapists and stalkers is timely: many senior police are concerned that after a few years in the post, many of their officers are suffering from 'domestic abuse fatigue'. On average every officer will be called out once a day to a 'domestic' and too often these end up with a victim refusing to report their abuser, or to leave or prosecute them. This discourages the police, who seek a just outcome. To address this 'fatigue' we are collaborating with Thames Valley police and its landmark Behavioural Science Unit to train 48 officers in handling domestic abuse victims. The latter may give confused and confusing testimonies, and it may take time to follow through with a prosecution, but victims who have a positive encounter with the police gain the courage and confidence to act. Police, too, need to gain confidence and recognise that as first responders they can be OdoneCEO, Fair Hearing Sir, Fraser Nelson succinctly points out the problems with the Department for Work and Pensions arrangements for claims for sickness benefit ('How Kendall can stop this national sickness', Jun 28). Part of these problems appear to relate to a feeling of fear of telling the claimant that they are not entitled to the benefit. Some years ago I went for an interview for the job of becoming an assessor, and I failed to get the job. When I inquired why I had not been taken on, I was told that my answer to the question of 'What would you say to a candidate, whom you had seen marching easily up the hill on your way here, when he claimed he could not walk?' had counted against me. I had suggested a further medical assessment but the correct answer, so I was told, was that you believe exactly what the candidate tells you. It would seem that little has changed over the Englehart MRCPBrentford, Middx Sir, When our prime minister explains the shambles over welfare legislation by his being distracted by foreign affairs, he displays a misunderstanding of his role ('Starmer's first year is worst start ever for a PM, says polling guru', Jun 30). He is not supposed to be seeing to everything himself but setting the overall direction of his government and trusting the ministers he has chosen to get on with business in their allotted areas. If, while he is quite properly fronting up government efforts in one direction, a minister in another area messes up, then his responsibility is to replace that minister with someone more CoghlinDitchling, E Sussex Sir, Joanna Williams states the heart of the Church of England's problem ('Only turning to God can make CofE relevant', comment, Jun 30). If Jesus did not die on a Roman cross and rise from the dead three days later, according to the remarkably well-attested biblical accounts, then there is no Christian gospel to save anyone; there is no hope. This is the primary message and must be at the forefront of the Church of England's mission. Where it is at the forefront, churches (in my experience) are growing, and even having to fit in more Sunday services to accommodate the MonroChair of trustees, Gafcon International; London EC1 Sir, Trevor Phillips compares the present government with 'a liberal pressure group, adrift from its roots, blown hither and thither by the breeze of fashionable opinion' ('How Keir's feeble grip on power got weaker', Jun 30). As Joanna Williams points out in the same edition, much the same can be said about Church of England ElliotBurford, Oxon Sir, Both the England Cricket Board (ECB) and Sports Medicine Australia have published guidelines for play in hot conditions. The two documents could not be more different. The Australian one gives specific guidance as to what constitutes low, medium, high and extreme risk conditions based on temperature and humidity forecasts given by the national meteorological office, and offers guidance on how to cope with such conditions. In contrast the ECB document is wishy-washy, leaving it up to the match organisers/officials to decide whether the conditions warrant special playing conditions, even though they have had no specific training in assessing extreme VlietstraCricket umpire; Fleet, Hants Sir, You mention the mission to make crosswords an Olympic sport ('Cryptic fans square off for first world title', news, Jun 29). Although this idea might surprise many, it should be seen in context. From 1912 to 1948 art competitions were included in the Olympic Games, and included architecture, literature, music, painting and sculpture. More recently chess was an exhibition event at the 2000 à BrassardSports historian, London SW7 Sir, While I agree with Emma Duncan's recommendation to replace your Birkin with a sturdy Waitrose bag for life (Notebook, Jun 30), I've seen an even stronger recommendation of their utility. Their robustness makes them not only the carrier bag of choice for rough sleepers but also for shoplifters nipping into Sainsbury's on Kilburn High Road to raid the wine and spirits aisle then leg it with their booty secure. Both Hermès and Waitrose bags may denote an ability to circumvent the penalties of SmithLondon NW6 Write to letters@
