Afternoon summary
Keir Starmer still faces a four-day battle to persuade Labour MPs to back his UC and Pip bill after the £3bn-a-year concessions announced overnight failed to fully quell the backbencher rebellion over the issue. Although Meg Hillier, who tabled the reasoned amendment that would kill the bill, has welcomed the U-turn, many MPs remain unconvinced. At least 50 MPs are still determined to oppose the bill, the Labour MP Cat Eccles told the World at One. (See 2pm.) Disability rights campaigners have also urged MPs to continue opposing the bill. (See 1.03pm.)
Here are comments from two more Labour MPs who say they remain opposed to the welfare bill, despite the concessions announced by Keir Starmer.
These are from Bell Ribeiro-Addy.
These proposed concessions to the Welfare Bill don’t go far enough.
No consultation with disabled people
No government impact assessment
No OBR analysis
No publication of PIP or Mayfield Review
The Reasoned Amendment was clear. Disabled people are being ignored.
A two-tier welfare system is not a concession, it’s discrimination.
Even with new proposals, this £3bn cut will deepen poverty and hardship for disabled people.
No tweaks can justify this assault on welfare.
MPs are being asked to vote on billions in cuts, based on a last-minute new draft or verbal promises.
The Govt plans to cram the rest of the Bill into 1 day.
No real scrutiny or consultation.
The debate around this Bill has become too toxic. It should simply be scrapped.
And this is from Simon Opher.
The government has shifted their position on the welfare reform bill, which is welcome. I’m glad they are listening. It could go some way to help disabled people stay in the jobs they have, and helps take the pressure of those who were most anxious about the potential impact of the reforms on their lives.
However, legislating inequality into our benefits system is not the way to solve this. It will condemn younger disabled people, and those yet to become disabled, to lives of worsening health and needless hardship. The support that disabled people receive is, at best, limited. The ‘concessions’ look more like an attempt to sort a political problem, rather than a serious review of how best to support disabled people and those with long term health issues in their lives and at work. The support you get should depend on need, not when you applied for it.
The changes do not tackle the eligibility issues that are at the heart of many of the problems with PIP.
The bill should be scrapped and we should start again and put the needs of disabled people at the centre of the process.
