New DWP proposed welfare reforms due for debate in Parliament at start of next month

The UK Government needs to have the planned legislation approved by November to implement it next year.
Commons Leader Lucy Powell announced on Thursday that proposed legislation to reform the welfare system will be debated by MPs for the first time next month. MPs are also expected to vote on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill on July 1, when it receives its second reading in the Commons.
The UK Government has faced backlash from some Labour MPs over the 'damaging disability benefit cuts', which it has said could save up to £5 billion a year. Vicky Foxcroft resigned as Labour Whip on Thursday, informing Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer by letter that she understood 'the need to address the ever-increasing welfare bill' but did not believe the proposed cuts 'should be part of the solution'.
‌
Parliament rises for summer recess on July 22 and will not return to the House of Commons until September 1. The legislation needs to be approved by Parliament by this November in order for it to come into force next November.
‌
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is scheduled to appear in the Commons on Monday (June 23) for its scheduled oral questions session, where MPs are expected to press Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall and her senior ministerial team on the proposed reforms.
The reforms - aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work - are set to include the tightening of criteria for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which is the main disability benefit, as well as a cut to the sickness-related element of Universal Credit and delayed access to only those aged 22 and over.
Earlier this week, the DWP boss said the legislation 'marks the moment we take the road of compassion, opportunity and dignity'.
She added: 'Our social security system is at a crossroads. Unless we reform it, more people will be denied opportunities, and it may not be there for those who need it.'
In what could be seen as an attempt to head off some opposition, the legislation will give existing claimants a 13-week period of financial support.
DWP said this will apply to those affected by changes to the PIP daily living component, including those who lose their eligibility to Carers Allowance and the carer's element of Universal Credit.
‌
But campaigners, including disability equality charity Scope, said the longer transition period, up from an originally expected four weeks, 'will only temporarily delay a cut and disabled people will continue to be living with extra costs when it comes to an end'.
The latest DWP figures published on Tuesday, showed that more than 3.7 million people in England and Wales are claiming PIP, with teenagers and young adults making up a growing proportion.
‌
PIP is not means-tested and provides financial support of between £29.20 and £187.45 per week to people with a disability, long-term illness, physical or mental health condition who need help doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition.
An impact assessment published alongside Wednesday's Bill introduction confirmed previously published estimates that changes to PIP entitlement rules could see around 800,000 people lose out, with an average loss of £4,500 per year.
The impact assessment also confirmed a previous estimate that some 250,000 more people, including 50,000 children, are likely to fall into relative poverty after housing costs in 2029/2030, although the UK Government repeated that this does not take into account the potentially positive impact of £1 billion annual funding by then for measures to support people into work.
‌
Changes to Universal Credit are expected to see an estimated 2.25 million current recipients of the health element impacted, with an average loss of £500 per year.
But the UK Government said around 3.9m households not on the Universal Credit health element are expected to have an average annual gain of £265 from the increase in the standard Universal Credit allowance.
While all of the Bill applies to England and Wales, only the Universal Credit changes apply to Scotland.
‌
The Scottish Government announced on Wednesday it will not mirror the planned changes to PIP in Adult Disability Payment (ADP).
The latest Social Security Scotland figures show that at the end of April there were 476,295 people receiving financial support of up to £187.45 per week through the devolved disability benefit.
‌
Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville , said: 'The UK Government's proposed reforms will be hugely damaging to those who rely on social security support, particularly during the ongoing cost of living crisis. These plans have yet to be passed at Westminster, so there is still time for the UK Government to step back from this damaging policy and I strongly urge them to scrap their harmful proposals.
'The UK Government's own analysis highlights how the proposals will push 250,000 more people across the UK into poverty - including 50,000 children. With around half of all children in poverty in Scotland living in a household with a disabled person, the changes threaten to undermine the progress that we are making to reduce child poverty, and the work of the UK Government's Child Poverty Taskforce.
'That the UK Government is prioritising deep cuts to disabled people's support is made even worse by their failure to abolish the two-child limit, which is estimated to have pushed more than 35,000 children into poverty since July last year.'
‌
She added: 'The reforms do not reflect the Scottish Government's values. We will not let disabled people down or cast them aside as the UK Government has done. We will not cut Scotland's Adult Disability Payment.
'The UK Government should follow our lead and protect the social security safety system, rather than dismantling it. If they do not, then disabled people can draw no other conclusion than the UK Government remain content to balance the books on the backs of the most vulnerable.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Western Telegraph

29 minutes ago

• Western Telegraph

MPs share their own stories as assisted dying debate continues

Debating the proposal to roll out assisted dying in the UK, Sir James Cleverly described losing his 'closest friend earlier this year' and said his opposition did not come from 'a position of ignorance'. The Conservative former minister said he and 'the vast majority' of lawmakers were 'sympathetic with the underlying motivation of' the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, 'which is to ease suffering in others and to try and avoid suffering where possible'. I have seen someone suffering – my closest friend earlier this year died painfully of oesophageal cancer and I was with him in the final weeks of his life. So I come at this not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance Sir James Cleverly But he warned MPs not to 'sub-contract' scrutiny of the draft new law to peers, if the Bill clears the Commons after Friday's third reading debate. Backing the proposal, Conservative MP Mark Garnier said 'the time has come where we need to end suffering where suffering can be put aside, and not try to do something which is going to be super perfect and allow too many more people to suffer in the future'. He told MPs that his mother died after a 'huge amount of pain', following a diagnosis in 2012 of pancreatic cancer. Sir James, who described himself as an atheist, said: 'I've had this said to me on a number of occasions, 'if you had seen someone suffering, you would agree with this Bill'. 'Well, Mr Speaker, I have seen someone suffering – my closest friend earlier this year died painfully of oesophageal cancer and I was with him in the final weeks of his life. 'So I come at this not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance.' Labour MP Siobhain McDonagh spoke int he assisted dying debate (House of Commons/PA) Labour MP for Mitcham and Morden Dame Siobhain McDonagh intervened in Sir James's speech and said: 'On Tuesday, it is the second anniversary of my sister's death. 'Three weeks prior to her death, we took her to hospital because she had a blood infection, and in spite of agreeing to allow her into intensive care to sort out that blood infection, the consultant decided that she shouldn't go because she had a brain tumour and she was going to die. 'She was going to die, but not at that moment. 'I'm sure Mr Speaker can understand that a very big row ensued. I won that row. 'She was made well, she came home and she died peacefully. What does (Sir James) think would happen in identical circumstances, if this Bill existed?' Sir James replied: 'She asks me to speculate into a set of circumstances which are personal and painful, and I suspect she and I both know that the outcome could have been very, very different, and the the moments that she had with her sister, just like the moments I had with my dear friend, those moments might have been lost.' He had earlier said MPs 'were promised the gold-standard, a judicially underpinned set of protections and safeguards', which were removed when a committee of MPs scrutinised the Bill. He added: 'I've also heard where people are saying, 'well, there are problems, there are still issues, there are still concerns I have', well, 'the Lords will have their work to do'. 'But I don't think it is right and none of us should think that it is right to sub-contract our job to the other place (the House of Lords).' Mr Garnier, who is also a former minister, told the Commons he had watched 'the start of the decline for something as painful and as difficult as pancreatic cancer' after his mother's diagnosis. 'My mother wasn't frightened of dying at all,' he continued. 'My mother would talk about it and she knew that she was going to die, but she was terrified of the pain, and on many occasions she said to me and Caroline my wife, 'can we make it end?' 'And of course we couldn't, but she had very, very good care from the NHS.' Conservative MP Mark Garnier said he would back the Bill (PA) Mr Garnier later added: 'Contrary to this, I found myself two or three years ago going to the memorial service of one of my constituents who was a truly wonderful person, and she too had died of pancreatic cancer. 'But because she had been in Spain at the time – she spent quite a lot of time in Spain with her husband – she had the opportunity to go through the state-provided assisted dying programme that they do there. 'And I spoke to her widower – very briefly, but I spoke to him – and he was fascinating about it. He said it was an extraordinary, incredibly sad thing to have gone through, but it was something that made her suffering much less.' He said he was 'yet to be persuaded' that paving the way for assisted dying was 'a bad thing to do', and added: 'The only way I can possibly end today is by going through the 'aye' lobby.' If MPs back the Bill at third reading, it will face further scrutiny in the House of Lords at a later date.

Daily Mail​

36 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Labour's work to devise official definition of 'Islamophobia' should be suspended IMMEDIATELY as it risks worsening grooming gangs scandal, report warns

Labour moves to draw up an official definition of Islamophobia would shut down efforts to combat grooming gangs, a new report warns. The Policy Exchange think-tank said the work of the Government's 'Anti-Muslim Hate/Islamophobia Definition Working Group', set up earlier this year, should be immediately suspended. Devising a government-backed definition of Islamophobia – even though it would not initially have any force in law – would 'almost certainly turbocharge cancel culture ', it said. Policy Exchange's warning came days after a long-awaited review by Whitehall troubleshooter Baroness Casey found public bodies covered up sickening evidence about Asian grooming gangs 'for fear of appearing racist '. Councils, police forces and the Home Office repeatedly 'shied away' from dealing with 'uncomfortable' questions about the ethnicity of rapists preying on thousands of vulnerable girls. In the wake of the Casey review, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper promised to 'root out' the grooming gang 'scourge'. But Policy Exchange's report warns: 'At the same time, ministers are pursuing a policy which will have the opposite effect. 'It would have made exposing the grooming scandal even harder and slower than it already was. It will make rooting out the scourge more difficult. It will give perpetrators a new place to hide.' Ministers said in March that the move to devise a definition would 'seek to provide the government and other relevant bodies with an understanding of unacceptable treatment and prejudice against Muslim communities'. It would not carry statutory power, at least initially, but there have been widespread concerns that it would lead to Islam being given protections beyond those afforded to other religions. The work is being led by former Tory attorney general Dominic Grieve KC. Policy Exchange senior fellow and former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Sir John Jenkins, said in a letter to Mr Grieve: 'Whatever form of words is chosen, and whatever legal status it has to start with, any definition will have serious consequences. 'It will almost certainly turbocharge 'cancel culture'. 'Even without the force of an official definition, claims of Islamophobia are already used to close down legitimate debate and deter investigation of alleged wrongdoing, as in Rotherham or Batley, with disastrous results all round, including for the wider Muslim community itself.' He added: 'Unless it literally restates the existing legal protections covering all faiths, any official Islamophobia definition will be an undeniable act of two-tier policy, creating special status and protection for members of one faith alone. 'It is unlikely to alleviate Islamist discontent – it will stoke it, creating new opportunities for grievance politics, challenge and attack in every institution and workplace.' Sir John said the working group 'may have begun its work with its conclusions pre-determined', adding that he had 'little confidence' it would approach key issues with an open mind. The report said the government's work should be put on hold until the end of a national inquiry on grooming gangs, which Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer belatedly ordered in the wake of the Casey review. Dr Paul Stott, head of security and extremism at Policy Exchange, said: ''A danger going forward is that the proposed 'Islamophobia' definition could shut down discussion on grooming gangs and if accepted by Government restrict debate on this and on other issues vital to our social cohesion.' He added: 'This week has demonstrated the need to move on from the view that concern about grooming gangs is in some way racist, Islamophobic, or a far-right issue. 'It is clearly not and it never was.'

Edinburgh Reporter

39 minutes ago

• Edinburgh Reporter

Council agrees to trial a four day working week

After Thursday's meeting of the full council, councillors have agreed to consider moving to a four day week to improve the wellbeing of employees. Cllr Claire Miller who proposed the idea suggested it would also help to tackle overuse of agency workers, and boost the council's productivity. Supported overwhelmingly by the Green, SNP, Labour and Liberal Democrat council groups, officers have been instructed to prepare a report outlining how this innovative policy could be adopted for the capital. Cllr Miller said: 'When faced with the need for budget cuts every year, it's a joy to find a proposal which helps to save money while also being beneficial rather than detrimental. And the four day week is just that. 'The four day week is one where services remain as-is – there are no changes as far as residents are concerned, either in opening hours or what's provided – but our workers deliver in a reduced working week. Studies of four day weeks show that productivity remains the same, or in some cases even improves, when the number of hours worked is reduced down and a greater proportion of the week is given back to people for their other responsibilities, for rest and for leisure.' In a written deputation to the Council meeting, the Campaign Director of the 4 Day Week Campaign cited a trial undertaken by South Cambridgeshire District Council: 'The key takeaway from South Cambridgeshire's experience is that a well-structured four-day week can improve productivity, boost recruitment and wellbeing, and—crucially—save taxpayers money. With hundreds of companies across the UK already successfully adopting a four-day week, and the results of the Scottish Government's public sector pilot out next month, now is a great time for the council to embark on this journey.' Representatives from both Unite and Unison trades unions, who represent council staff, also spoke in favour of the motion and urged councillors to prioritise this long-held ask of workers' rights organisations. Like this: Like Related