Labour have made it clear today that, regardless of any concessions they might make to rebels, they still intend to force the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill through with the absolute minimum scrutiny parliament allows.

Lucy Powell, Leader of the House of Commons, announced the proposed timetable for the bill today.

Powell told MPs “I want to reassure colleagues that we take parliamentary scrutiny and process of bills extremely seriously, and that’s what our parliamentary democracy is all about.”  

At the same time she revealed that the second reading will take place on Tuesday and every other stage of the bill – committee, report and third reading - will be rushed through in the space of a single day the week after.

Not only that, but as feared, a symbol on the parliament website shows that Labour aims to have this bill certified as a money bill, removing any effective power from the House of Lords to amend it.  The final decision on this rests with the speaker, after all amendments have been voted on.

We covered the fast track procedures for a “committee of the whole house” and a money bill here a fortnight ago.

Labour’s plan will make it much more difficult for rebel MPs to scrutinise and amend any concessions offered by the government, as this series of posts on Bluesky by Ruth Fox,  Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Director & Head of Research at the Hansard Society explains:

The Government cramming Committee, Report & 3rd Reading into 1 day the week after 2nd Reading (so much for intervals between stages...) means if they pull the Bill they will have 2 days of Commons business to fill. But of greater concern is that this timetable has important implications for...

...those Labour MPs who have signed the reasoned amendment. If the Govt promises concessions in advance of 2nd Reading those will only crystallise at Committee Stage on the 9 July. If they are not quite right, or what the MPs think they were signing up for there will be little time for making...

...changes. If normal procedures are followed the Government should table amendments at least one sitting week in advance - so by the end of Wed 2nd July, the day after 2nd Reading. Non Government MPs will be able to table their own amendments up to three sitting days beforehand - so by the end...

...of the sitting on Friday 4 July. But if MPs are not happy with the proposals made they will have to be resolved on the floor of the Chamber itself on the 9th. This is where the lack of time for reflection, taking advice, can get messy with amendments being proposed and voted...

...on almost in real time. The Bill will go to the House of Lords but it is a money bill so the Lords does not normally have a Committee and Report stage (it is “negatived” in parliamentary parlance) to amend the Bill. They debate it at 2nd Reading and then the remaining stages are a formality.

This underlines how important the Commons scrutiny is. There is no revising backstop for money bills.

So, it seems clear that the government still intends to railroad this bill though before the summer recess, even if they have to give some ground in order to do so.

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    Just as I feared😔😡. To think Keir Starmer was a human rights solicitor. I am disgusted and in despair. How is this legal or allowed?  More emails to MP's I think 🤔. I am all out of energy.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    So Starmer has just announced the changes will only affect new claimants. Existing claimants will not be subject to the new rules.
    It's not clear if you will be affected by the new rules when you get reviewed.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Cathedral city If the new rules applied when you get reviewed, that would be no different to the original proposals. I don’t know if it means people who currently get pip and LCWRA and won’t improve will never be reassessed, or (more likely) the old rules will apply when they get reassessed. Which would be a horrible two tiered system. I hold out hope that they’ve done something about that terrible 4 point rule and gateway for new claimants (as I haven’t seen that spelled out yet in news reports) but that’s probably naive. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @Cathedral city We need to check this out somehow..this is what I'm worried about. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    I’m completely lost, what on earth is going on? One minute the rebel Labour MP’s are 1/3 and rising, now it’s all over and he’s rushing it through a a money bill. Can someone please explain in layman’s terms to me what’s happening, have we lost, is it all over and a done deal? 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    An important bill like this that will affect so many is not going to be democratically scrutinised by parliaments speaks volumes about this labour leadership and government. We have to now wait to see what takes by the end of next week and what kind of a fight is put up if any by labour mps. Whatever happens we shall not forget how we were treated and will punish labour accordingly in the next general elections which is our right to do so!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    But if they don't give enough ground it wont be voted through so it wont need any more scrutiny. Money bill or parrot's bill It doesn't matter what they call it if the parrot is dead.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    This does not a thing for those that come after us!

    Peston: PM to make 'substantial u-turn' on PIP payments


    I understand Starmer’s offer to the welfare rebel MPs is to protect PIP payments for all existing claimants forever.

    There would be no detriment from the reforms for existing claimants.

    This would shave circa £2bn from the reform savings by 2029. I am unclear whether this would persuade enough rebels to back the remaining reforms in next Tuesday’s vote.
    There will also be “grandfathering” of the disability top up universal credit for existing claimants. So again no detriment to existing claimants.

    My estimate is this would shave another billion pounds or so from the reform savings by 2029.
    Finally, and importantly, the rebels - led by Treasury committee chair Meg Hillier - have secured agreement that the Stephen Timms review of how to assess entitlement to disability benefits will be a co-production with disability rights groups.

    This is seen by rebel MPs as a major concession.
    My assumption is that enough rebel MPs will now drop their opposition to the reforms and Starmer will win on Tuesday.

    But make no mistake, this is another substantial government u-turn.


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 21 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard ''I understand Starmer’s offer to the welfare rebel MPs is to protect PIP payments for all existing claimants forever.'' 

      I never heard that, but good for those with current awards....if actually true.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard I agree.  In part.  At the very least, it does mean that these changes would follow the pattern of changes in the past - such as where the existing recipients of the extra money for LCW didn't lose it when that money was scrapped in 2017.   

      The problem that rebels and we have is that if the bill is ditched entirely, what will the govt come up with in the autumn instead?  It could be even worse, or this one could be brought forward as part of the budget and bulldozed through.  It's another six months of uncertainty, and I think we're all exhausted by what has been going on over the last eighteen months.  

      The major issue is future claimants, but my gut feeling right now is that saving 300,000+ people from losing their benefits of sometimes £9000 is not to be sniffed at - and we didn't have a sniff of achieving that a week ago.  Who would have thought we would achieve that? And I also feel that if we keep up the fight without a break going forward, we will actually fall to pieces both individually and collectively as a force.   We need a rest. 

      So my feeling is to be pragmatic, take this as a win for 300,000 people who won't be thrown into poverty or forced to use foodbanks.  We will have won a battle, but not the war.  

      Take a breather, and then work out how we fight on behalf of those that follow us, because this bill doesn't tackle the changes to UC LCWRA eligibility at all.  That's further down the road.  Those changes won't affect us very much if the current concessions go through, but they will affect the future disabled people.  So collectively fight on their behalf when THAT bill comes out so that they are not faced with having neither PIP or LCWRA.   If we could assure them ONE of those, we will have done pretty well, and it's something to make a positive campaign around.



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard This is a f***ing scandal. What about the young people and children of today, and in future? What about the adults now who aren't yet claimants but who will become chronically sick and disabled in the future? The rebels mustn't sell them out, that is not the answer to this wicked bill. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Yorkie Bard Very interesting. Of course that would be nice for us. And from a selfish point of you I would perhaps accept that. But can't help but feel for the poor sods after us that aren't going to be so fortunate. Saying that if Reform get in next time I suspect there will be more cuts so likely only a temporary respite I think for all of us anyway.  


      Starmer and his entourage are becoming a bunch of U-turners but
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    The concessions offered are gimmicks and don't change how much devastating harm the bill will cause to disabled people.

    All the harm comes from these three changes to eligibility:

    1. Making LCWRA eligibility conditional on PIP receipt.
    2. 
    Making PIP receipt conditional on scoring 4 points in one descriptor.
    3. Abolishing the WCA.

    The only concessions which would reduce harm are scrapping those 3 changes to eligibility. All other concessions are just gimmicks which will not reduce harm.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @SLB Are you sure? What's happening with points 1 and 3 then since they are in the green paper? When are they being legislated?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Anon Thankfully, points 1 and 3 are not part of this bill.  That's a fight for another day.  Point 2 is now (reportedly) for new claimants only.  
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    Same sort of report in the Telegraph just published
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 23 days ago
    Guardian reporting government have promised massive concessions 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @robbie Yup. Could affect my family- we don’t know yet. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 22 days ago
      @James yes, like how are ESA to UC migrations going to be treated if they are entitled to transitional protections and they have SDP? I know this has been litigated under UC, but labour might try to screw things again.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Anniesmum The so called concessions are still unacceptable. The Guardian :
      "The compromise solution would mean the cuts being applied only to new claimants, while those who already get disability payments will continue to do so.

      So future generations of disabled people get screwed over and left in dire poverty. 
      Ministers have also agreed to expand and bring forward a package of employment support measures so that £1bn will now be available for them this year, and several billion across the whole of the parliament. The government had previously promised just £1bn in this parliament, to be voted on at a later date.

      What about the millions of disabled people who are never going to be able to work? 

      Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, will promise that disability groups will be consulted on how the criteria should change in the future. Changes recommended by that process will be incorporated at later stages of the bill, possibly at committee stage."
      More gasllighting. The current sham consultation over the green paper reveals how the Red tories in power cannot be trusted. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @James It's going to be a long antagonising few days.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 23 days ago
      @Anniesmum Making the proposals apply to new claimants only sounds very unfair. Imagine people in the same family with inherited conditions, for example. 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact