Latest news with #backbenchers
Daily Mail
12 hours ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Keir Starmer's authority has vanished. What's the point of this Government? When the time comes the British people will kick him into orbit: Read BORIS JOHNSON's devastating verdict a year on from Labour's loveless landslide
So that's it. Pffft! With a long sibilant farting efflatus as if from a punctured balloon the last of Keir Starmer 's authority has vanished to the four winds. He can't control his backbenchers. He can't deliver on his election promises. His flagship welfare reform Bill – once hailed as the superdreadnought of the Labour fleet – has run up the white flag at the first whiff of gunfire and vanished back to port.
The Guardian
20 hours ago
- Business
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on Labour's disability benefits rethink: concessions suggest strategy not a change of heart
The humbling of a prime minister by his own side is rarely an edifying spectacle, but it does at least suggest a pulse in the parliamentary system. Sir Keir Starmer has now staged three conspicuous retreats: over winter fuel payments, over grooming gangs and now – most perilously – over sweeping changes to disability benefits. Two of these reversals followed backbench unrest. This week's about-face on the government's flagship welfare bill looks less like a full U-turn than a partial climbdown designed to avert open rebellion. While Sir Keir has taken a step back over benefit changes, which affect the most vulnerable in society, the result resembles textbook damage control. The concessions, presented as a response to principled pressure, feel more like fallback options held in reserve for moments of internal disquiet. The first is that existing personal independence payment (Pip) claimants will be spared new, tighter assessments – at least for now. But about 430,000 new Pip claimants who would qualify under current rules still face being excluded when tougher criteria arrive in November 2026. The second is that the health element of universal credit will no longer be frozen for current recipients. But new claimants – many too unwell to work – will be placed on a reduced rate unless they meet a higher threshold. All Pip awards are periodically reassessed, implying that all recipients could eventually face the new scheme. The upshot is that existing claimants would be protected, but future ones face tougher rules. Two people with identical conditions could receive support, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, that differs by up to £6,560 a year – purely due to timing. This, we're told, is compassion. The savings – halved to £2.5bn a year – come by offloading the cost on to future claimants. MPs rightly fear this locks in a two-tier system that is deliberately harsher on disabled people. Older Labour MPs will remember denouncing this very playbook. A decade ago, Iain Duncan Smith pioneered a slow, procedural tightening of welfare – hitting new claimants first, then reassessing the rest – precisely to defuse resistance. Labour opposed it then. Today, it is governing by the same method. It feels out of step with a post-pandemic Britain grappling with a cost of living crisis. Many Labour MPs believe these are still the wrong reforms and will vote against the bill when it comes back to the House of Commons next week. Clearly, tightened eligibility and a two-tier system may exclude many who need support. If the government wants to raise money, it might ask a little more of those with the broadest shoulders – not those with mobility aids, care plans and the audacity to ask for a fair deal. If ministers truly believe they are acting decently, they should publish the impact assessment and be honest about the consequences. Perhaps the most telling lesson is not about policy detail, but about political temperament. Modern governments are always under pressure to appear fiscally restrained. Yet whether – or how – they choose to meet that pressure reveals what they value, and who they believe can be asked to bear the costs. The welfare state has always relied on consent, and on a basic sense of fairness. If a Labour government cannot convincingly defend that principle, it risks more than backbench unrest; it risks eroding the trust that makes reform, essential in any changing society, possible in the first place. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
The Independent
a day ago
- Business
- The Independent
Labour MPs demand ‘reset' in relations with Number 10 after welfare U-turn
Labour MPs have called for a reset in relations with Downing Street as the fallout from the welfare rebellion threatens to cause lasting damage. A late-night climbdown on welfare cuts from Number 10 may have seen off the threat of Sir Keir Starmer's first major Commons defeat, with rebels suggesting they now expect the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill to pass its first hurdle on July 1. But speaking to the PA news agency, a number of Labour backbenchers expressed deeper frustration with how Downing Street has handled its backbenchers since last year's election. One warned that discontent and low morale among MPs would 'continue to fester' without a 'wider reset' in relations between Number 10 and the Parliamentary Labour Party after 'a year of poor party management'. Another accused decision-makers in Government of operating as an 'exclusive club' and showing 'disregard' for both backbenchers and experts outside Westminster. They told PA: 'I think the Government have got to stop pretending they know everything and start listening, because they might learn something.' Several backbenchers pointed to the Prime Minister's words at a press conference on Wednesday, in which he referred to keeping a 'focus on the change that we want to bring about' rather than the 'noises off'. Although Government sources suggested Sir Keir was talking in more general terms, rebels have taken his 'noises off' comment as referring to them. One said: 'A lot of colleagues are sickened at language being used, from the PM's 'noises off' to the senior source saying they thought Keir and Morgan (McSweeney, the Prime Minister's chief of staff) had cleansed the party of self-indulgent rubbish.' But their frustration is not shared by all Labour backbenchers, with others suggesting Friday's U-turn on welfare cuts shows Downing Street is willing to listen. One told PA: 'They're a new team, they're a year in and occasionally teams do need to have a moment where things come to a head and they learn.' Arguing that some backbenchers needed to 'chill out and have a cup of tea', they added they thought the Prime Minister had 'clocked that it's important that we work as part of a team. 'All of us want him to succeed and all of us want the Government to succeed,' they said. A Number 10 spokesman insisted on Friday that the Prime Minister 'remains fully committed to engaging with parliamentarians'.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Labour MPs demand ‘reset' in relations with Number 10 after welfare U-turn
Labour MPs have called for a reset in relations with Downing Street as the fallout from the welfare rebellion threatens to cause lasting damage. A late-night climbdown on welfare cuts from Number 10 may have seen off the threat of Sir Keir Starmer's first major Commons defeat, with rebels suggesting they now expect the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill to pass its first hurdle on July 1. But speaking to the PA news agency, a number of Labour backbenchers expressed deeper frustration with how Downing Street has handled its backbenchers since last year's election. One warned that discontent and low morale among MPs would 'continue to fester' without a 'wider reset' in relations between Number 10 and the Parliamentary Labour Party after 'a year of poor party management'. Another accused decision-makers in Government of operating as an 'exclusive club' and showing 'disregard' for both backbenchers and experts outside Westminster. They told PA: 'I think the Government have got to stop pretending they know everything and start listening, because they might learn something.' Several backbenchers pointed to the Prime Minister's words at a press conference on Wednesday, in which he referred to keeping a 'focus on the change that we want to bring about' rather than the 'noises off'. Although Government sources suggested Sir Keir was talking in more general terms, rebels have taken his 'noises off' comment as referring to them. One said: 'A lot of colleagues are sickened at language being used, from the PM's 'noises off' to the senior source saying they thought Keir and Morgan (McSweeney, the Prime Minister's chief of staff) had cleansed the party of self-indulgent rubbish.' But their frustration is not shared by all Labour backbenchers, with others suggesting Friday's U-turn on welfare cuts shows Downing Street is willing to listen. One told PA: 'They're a new team, they're a year in and occasionally teams do need to have a moment where things come to a head and they learn.' Arguing that some backbenchers needed to 'chill out and have a cup of tea', they added they thought the Prime Minister had 'clocked that it's important that we work as part of a team. 'All of us want him to succeed and all of us want the Government to succeed,' they said. A Number 10 spokesman insisted on Friday that the Prime Minister 'remains fully committed to engaging with parliamentarians'.
BBC News
2 days ago
- Business
- BBC News
PM 'agrees' benefit changes deal with Labour rebels
The government is expected to announce a deal shortly with Labour rebels on its planned benefits changes. Multiple sources tell the BBC existing claimants of the Personal Independence Payment (Pip) will continue to receive what they currently get, as will recipients of the health element of Universal Credit. It is also expected that the support to help people into employment will be fast forwarded so it happens concessions amount to a massive climbdown from the government, which was staring at the prospect of defeat if it failed to accommodate the demands of over 100 of its backbenchers. Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to keep up with the inner workings of Westminster and beyond.
