Latest news with #Commons'
Spectator
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Spectator
With Nadine Dorries
Nadine Dorries is one of the most recognisable Conservative politicians from the past two decades. Elected as the MP for Mid Bedfordshire in 2005, she notably clashed with David Cameron and George Osborne (who she called 'two arrogant posh boys') and lost the whip in 2012 when she took part in the reality show I'm A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here. Loyal to Boris Johnson, she served in his government and rose to be Culture Secretary. She stood down in 2023 and went on to write about politics in the bestselling books The Plot and Downfall. On the podcast, Nadine tells the Spectator's executive editor Lara Prendergast about her memories of tinned burgers and Sunday lunches as a child, working long shifts as a nurse in Warrington and what it was like spending a year in Zambia. She also explains the 'relentless' but 'collegiate' atmosphere of Parliament and how she once saw a mouse at the Commons' salad bar. Nadine explains what it is like to have recently used the weight-loss jab Mounjaro and why, in her family, she is still the 'queen of the Sunday roast'. Produced by Patrick Gibbons.
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Work and pensions secretary tells MPs controversial disability benefit reforms will go ahead next year
The government has told MPs it will not back down from its controversial reforms to disability benefits, which are set to be introduced to parliament later this month. More than 100 Labour MPs are thought to have concerns about the plans to cut nearly £5bn from the welfare bill by restricting personal independence payments (PIP) and the health top-up to Universal Credit. Charities say the changes will have a "catastrophic" effect on vulnerable people. Politics Hub: The chair of the Commons' Work and Pensions Committee wrote to the secretary of state, Liz Kendall, last month, calling on the government to delay the changes until a full assessment is carried out of the impact on employment, poverty and health. Labour MP Debbie Abrahams wrote that while there was a case for reform to disability benefits, "the evidence indicated [these changes] might not improve outcomes for most claimants, but instead push many into poverty and further away from the labour market". But Ms Kendall has written back, in a letter made public on Wednesday, to reject the idea because the bill needs final approval from parliament in November in order for the changes to take effect in 2026. She wrote: "We need urgent action to help people who can work, into work. With one in eight young people now not in education, employment or training and nearly 2.8 million people out of work due to long-term sickness, and spending on health and disability benefits set to rise by an additional £18bn, we must change course. "We have consistently been clear that we are not consulting on every proposal. "Instead, parliament will have the opportunity to fully debate, propose amendments to, and vote on areas where we have announced urgent reforms that are not subject to consultation. "With PIP caseload and costs forecast to continue rising, reforms are needed now to make the system sustainable, while supporting those people with the greatest needs." The government says the PIP caseload has more than doubled from 15,000 new claims per month in 2019 to 34,000. PIP is a benefit to help disabled people with the increased costs of day-to-day living. It is proposed that claimants will need to achieve four points out of eight in their assessment to qualify for the benefit, and the government says some 370,000 existing claimants will lose out when reassessed. Ms Kendall says the growth in claims means the PIP caseload will still increase by the end of the parliament. The government will also tackle what Ms Kendall called the "perverse incentive" to claim the health top-up for Universal Credit by freezing it at £97 a week for existing claimants, and slashing the rate to £50 a week for new claimants. The average loss of benefits will be £1,700 a year for some three million people. Claimants with the most serious conditions, who have been assessed as never able to work, will not be subject to reassessment, ministers say, allowing them to have peace of mind. The government will provide £1bn for targeted support schemes to help disabled people into work. But it's estimated these will help only some 70,000 people find employment. Ms Kendall said a minister in her department is engaging with disabled people and organisations about the PIP assessment process, but said: "The PIP assessment review will rightly take time and require extensive engagement, and we cannot wait for its conclusion to make the urgently needed changes to the PIP eligibility criteria." The first minister of Wales, Eluned Morgan, who is gearing up for elections next year, told Sky News she had spoken to Ms Kendall about her concerns last week. She said: "This is going to be really challenging for a lot of people in Wales. We know more people in Wales will be affected by PIP than in any other part of the country. "We do think there needs to be reform of welfare because we believe people can work should work, but in Wales we have examples of where we hold people's hands, stand by them, we help them into work, and we think that's more of a productive approach." Read more:Are tax rises inevitable after the spending review? Labour MP Richard Burgon, who has vowed to vote against the reforms, said: "This will be deeply disappointing news for all the MPs who've been urging the government to delay this decision. Instead of allowing time for proper scrutiny and meaningful dialogue with disabled people, the government has brushed aside MPs' genuine concerns. "These planned disability cuts should be scrapped - not rushed through without proper scrutiny."
Scotsman
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Scotsman
How Keir Starmer can escape damaging family farm tax row
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It would take a brave soul to claim that the first months of Keir Starmer's government have gone to plan. Even on the most generous assessment, ministers have been fighting on all fronts almost from day one – some conflicts inherited from the previous government, and some created by Labour themselves. No government can expect to fight every political battle at once and win. On at least one front, however, Starmer has the opportunity to make a gracious retreat – by accepting the cross-party consensus to pause changes to inheritance tax which are putting the future of family farms at risk. That is the conclusion of the report published today by the Commons' Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Select Committee, which I chair. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The committee took its work extremely seriously in agreeing our findings. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the constructive approach taken by my Labour colleagues on the committee in particular. Select committee work is hard enough at the best of times, let alone when you are dropped into a contentious debate just weeks after you were first elected. For us to come to a cross-party consensus in calling for a pause on the farm tax should be a red flag to ministers in Defra and the Treasury. Farmers protest over Labour's changes to inheritance tax on the Edinburgh city bypass (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell) | Getty Images Growing drumbeat of protest The way in which the government has acted over recent months has clearly badly affected the confidence and wellbeing of farmers. Our report's figures are stark: before the Autumn Budget, 70 per cent of farmers felt optimistic about the future of their rural businesses. That number has collapsed to just 12 per cent. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ministers have done their level best to dismiss farmers' concerns and ignore the strength of feeling in rural communities. The months of protests that saw tractors converge on Westminster and parade up and down the country should tell you how well that is going. Not every problem facing farmers was created by the current administration, but there has been a growing drumbeat of protest, culminating in the farm tax row, with farmers left feeling they cannot rely on the government to live up to its commitments, past or present. A positive story What our report makes clear is that there is a better and more constructive path forward, for both the government and farmers. There is a consensus to be found on inheritance tax that protects working family farms while tackling tax avoidance – if ministers can pause and rethink. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad After all, farmers ought to be the essential element in the government's goals to achieve food security and restore and protect the environment. There is a genuine opportunity for ministers to set out a positive vision for farming in a way that no government has managed to do for decades. It is the battle over inheritance tax that is getting in the way of that potentially positive story – and it will continue to do so for months to come if the Prime Minister does not grasp the nettle now. I hope that the government will take our recommendations seriously and pause their inheritance tax plan. There is a chance here for Starmer to rebuild trust and confidence in the farming sector – if he calls off the fight.
Daily Mirror
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mirror
Repeat of Grenfell fire warning issued as ministers 'left marking own homework'
MPs said it is 'completely unacceptable' that survivors and bereaved families of the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster 'are still awaiting justice for that terrible day' Ministers must not be 'left marking their own homework' over the Grenfell Tower tragedy, MPs have warned. The Commons' housing committee has written to Housing Secretary and Deputy PM Angela Rayner calling for an independent body to be introduced to oversee the Government's response to public inquiries. In their letter, MPs said it is 'completely unacceptable' that survivors and bereaved families of the 2017 Grenfell Tower disaster 'are still awaiting justice for that terrible day'. They welcomed the Government's decision to accept the recommendations from the Grenfell Inquiry's final report but said there must be an independent mechanism to hold it to account for implementing them. It warned there are 'significant risks of these recommendations not being implemented effectively if independent oversight is lacking'. READ MORE: Sadiq Khan urged to block high rise building that skirts Grenfell building rule by 30cm The committee called for a national oversight mechanism to be included in the upcoming Hillsborough Bill. It demanded a new system be in place before the tenth anniversary of the deadly Grenfell Tower fire on June 14, 2027. The letter said an oversight mechanism will "reduce the risk future governments repeating the catastrophic mistakes which have historically led to state-related deaths, from Hillsborough, to the infected blood scandal, to the Grenfell Tower fire itself'. Campaigners on a range of scandals, including the Grenfell fire and infected blood victims, have previously called for a national oversight mechanism - an independent public body - to be put in place, responsible for collating, analysing and following up on recommendations from public inquiries. They have argued that, without such a body in place, governments can delay the implementation of, or even ignore entirely, recommendations from public inquiries. Elsewhere, the letter raised fire safety concerns in care homes after London's Fire Commissioner Andy Roe told the committee earlier this year that it 'keeps me awake at night'. MPs called on the Government to 'urgently review' its decision to mandate sprinklers in new care homes, but not existing ones. Florence Eshalomi, the committee's chair, said: 'How can the loved ones of the Grenfell victims be asked to trust the Government to mark their own homework when they have spent nearly eight years fighting for answers as to why people were denied the most basic level of safety?' She continued: 'The Grenfell fire highlighted the toxic stigma too often faced by those living in social housing, where resident concerns were cruelly dismissed, neglected and ignored. 'As a Committee, we are determined to shine a light on this issue and to hold the Government to account for their role in addressing the systematic failings in building safety, product standards and testing, and fire safety exposed by the tragedy at Grenfell. Never again must people be left without such basic levels of safety in their own home.' A Government spokesperson said: "The Grenfell Tower tragedy claimed 72 innocent lives in a disaster that should never have happened. We are acting on all of the Inquiry's findings, working closely with industry, local authorities and the bereaved, survivors and residents, and have committed to updating on progress regularly. "We have also committed to introducing a more robust system to improve the transparency, accessibility and scrutiny of inquiry recommendations received by government."
Daily Mail
03-05-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Now British drone troops destined to aid Ukraine's war effort face new enemy: Health and safety!
British soldiers destined to aid Ukraine 's war effort are facing a fearsome foe closer to home – health and safety rules that hamper their training for drone warfare. Troops have been told to stop flying drones that weigh more than 250g (9oz) – the weight of a cucumber – over their comrades while training on Salisbury Plain, even if they are in heavily armoured tanks at the time. They have also been prevented from using signal-jamming equipment to stop drone pilots controlling the deadly devices due to fears it might interfere with satnavs and other gadgets used by residents near the Wiltshire site. It has prompted concerns that troops at the base will be under-prepared when dispatched to the Russian border to help Volodymyr Zelensky 's soldiers defend their homeland. Labour MP Fred Thomas, who sits on the Commons' Defence Committee, said: 'British soldiers who are deploying as part of a deterrence force to places like Estonia and eastern Europe are going out without the kind of training and capability that is completely bog-standard in warfare now, whether it is in the Middle East or in Ukraine.' 'They are taking steps to try to protect themselves by going online and buying kit to then tinker around with, to see if they can jam frequencies themselves,' he told the Financial Times. According to the newspaper, soldiers complained they had to make repeated requests to the Military Aviation Authority – part of the Ministry of Defence – for permission to fly a drone over a tank during a training exercise in March. This was despite the tank not having any personnel inside at the time. Rules are in place to stop the devices from being flown near airports, buildings or above members of the public. They were cited as the reason why soldiers had been prevented from practising electronic warfare, including using signals data to jam drones. But drones have become a crucial facet of modern warfare. Both Russian and Ukrainian troops jam radio control frequencies and video links between drones and pilots to down the devices. Last month Defence Secretary John Healey announced that Britain would send hundreds of thousands of drones to the Ukrainian frontline as part of a £450million aid package. The devices being supplied include 'first-person view' or FPV drones, to attack targets, and aerial devices, which can drop explosives on Russian positions. These types of drones are reported to be responsible for 60 to 70 per cent of damage caused to Russian equipment. But there are concerns that a lack of 'real-life' training will restrict British soldiers' ability when they reach the front-line. An MoD spokesman said: 'While operating within the UK, it's right that we balance safety with the need to train, innovate and operate new drone systems. To protect operational security and non-military environments, people would also expect us to ensure that electronic warfare capabilities have some restrictions.'
