• Search
  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • News
  • PIP cuts latest: almost one third of Labour MPs revolt; concessions to be made on Friday; vote still on for Tuesday

News

PIP cuts latest: almost one third of Labour MPs revolt; concessions to be made on Friday; vote still on for Tuesday

Details

There is no sign of the Labour revolt abating.  In fact, it is still growing and now stands at almost one third of all Labour MPs.

The total number of MPs who have signed the Labour rebels amendment is now 162.  However, with Greens, SNP, DUP and independent MPs also signing, the total no longer represents just Labour MPs.

There have been 6 Labour backbench signatories overnight, it has been reported.  We’ve spotted five of them:

  • Irene Campbell
  • Sarah Edwards
  • Mary Glindon
  • Toby Perkins
  • Gareth Snell

If anyone knows the sixth, please let us know and we’ll add them.

So we think the total is 129 Labour rebels (including 2 suspended), plus 33 from other parties.  [Correction:  thanks to Dee for spotting we had 4 NI politicians in our list.  We hope our numbers are correct now]

You can see the full list of MPs of all parties who have signed the amendment on the parliament website,  but we have our alphabetical list of Labour rebels at the bottom of this page.

Government dismissive of rebels

There appears to be little attempt so far by the government to build bridges with Labour’s rebels. 

Whips and ministers have allegedly threatened dire consequences, both for individual MPs and the government as a whole, unless the rebels back down.  But as a strategy that appears to have been less than successful, with one labour MP removing their name from the amendment and 25 adding theirs, since it was launched on Tuesday.

Keir Starmer probably didn’t help when he described the rebellion as “noises off”, whilst another member of government told The Times, “It’s so depressing to think Keir and Morgan did all that work to cleanse the party of this self-indulgent rubbish, only for it to erupt back.”

Concessions to be made on Friday

It is being widely reported in the media that ministers are working on concessions to the Labour rebels, which will be unveiled on Friday in the hopes of buying them off before Tuesday’s vote.

There is no indication of what the concessions might be and we are going to resist speculating about the possibilities.  Especially as it was being widely reported in the media yesterday that Tuesday’s vote would be postponed.

The only certainty at the moment appears to be that nothing is certain.

Protests to take place on Monday and Tuesday

There’s a  Stop Disability Benefit Cuts rally in Parliament Square on Monday 30 June at 4.30pm and protestors will also be gathering in Old Palace Yard from 1pm on Tuesday, 1 June to make their voices heard as the debate and vote takes place.

More details from DPAC.

Vote to be held on Tuesday . . . possibly

The leader of the House of Commons has confirmed that the second reading and vote on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill  will still go ahead on Tuesday 1 July as planned.

However, this absolutely doesn’t mean it definitely will happen.  If the concessions supposed to be made on Friday fail to sway the rebels, then the government may still decide to postpone the vote at the last minute.

Full alphabetical list Labour MPs who have signed the amendment

Abbott, Ms Diane

Abrahams, Debbie

Al-Hassan, Sadik

Ali, Tahir

Allin-Khan, Dr Rosena

Arthur, Dr Scott

Baker, Richard

Bance, Antonia

Barker, Paula

Barron, Lee

Beales, Danny

Beavers, Lorraine

Begum, Apsana

Betts, Mr Clive

Billington, Ms Polly

Bishop, Matt

Blake, Olivia

Brash, Mr Jonathan

Burgon, Richard

Burke, Maureen

Butler, Dawn

Byrne, Ian

Cadbury, Ruth

Campbell, Irene

Coleman, Ben

Collinge, Lizzi

Cooper, Andrew

Cooper, Dr Beccy

Craft, Jen

Creasy, Ms Stella

Davies, Paul

De Cordova, Marsha

Dean, Josh

Dhesi, Mr Tanmanjeet Singh

Dixon, Anna

Duncan-Jordan, Neil

Eccles, Cat

Edwards, Lauren

Edwards, Sarah

Efford, Clive

Ellis, Maya

Entwistle, Kirith

Eshalomi, Florence

Evans, Chris

Fenton-Glynn, Josh

Ferguson, Patricia

Foster, Mr Paul

Foxcroft, Vicky

Francis, Daniel

Furniss, Gill

Gardner, Dr Allison

Gilbert, Tracy

Glindon,  Mary

Gwynne,  Andrew Labour suspended

Hack, Amanda

Haigh, Louise

Hall, Sarah

Hamilton, Fabian

Hamilton, Paulette

Hayes, Helen

Hillier, Dame Meg

Hinchliff, Chris

Hume, Alison

Hurley, Patrick

Hussain, Imran

Jermy, Terry

Jogee, Adam

Johnson, Kim

Jones, Lillian

Jones, Ruth

Kelly Foy, Mary

Khan, Afzal

Lamb, Peter

Lavery, Ian

Leishman, Brian

Lewell, Emma

Lewis, Clive

Long Bailey, Rebecca

Maskell, Rachael

McDonald, Andy

McDonnell, John   Labour suspended

McKenna, Kevin

Midgley, Anneliese

Mishra, Navendu

Mohamed, Abtisam

Morris, Grahame

Mullane, Margaret

Myer, Luke

Naish, James

Naismith, Connor

Newbury, Josh

Nichols, Charlotte

Onn, Melanie

Opher, Dr Simon

Osamor, Kate

Osborne, Kate

Owen, Sarah

Paffey, Darren

Perkins, Toby

Pitcher, Lee

Platt, Jo

Quigley, Mr Richard

Qureshi, Yasmin

Ranger, Andrew

Rhodes, Martin

Ribeiro-Addy, Bell

Riddell-Carpenter, Jenny

Rimmer, Ms Marie

Robertson, Dave

Rushworth, Sam

Shah, Naz

Smith, Cat

Snell, Gareth

Sobel, Alex

Stainbank, Euan

Stewart, Elaine

Sullivan, Kirsteen

Trickett, Jon

Tufnell, Henry

Turner, Laurence

Vaughan, Tony

Webb, Chris

Western, Matt

Whittome, Nadia

Williams, David

Witherden, Steve

Yang, Yuan

Yasin, Mohammad

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.
    john
    · 4 hours ago
    According to City A.M. the free business newspaper for the City of London. If the government fails to go ahead with its disability benefit cuts it will lead to higher taxes and higher interest rates. So tax payers and mortgage payers unite against those too ill or disabled to work I guess. Not the rich. Oh no not the rich, they're the wealth creators and job creators don't you know.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      godgivemestrength
      · 2 hours ago
      @john
      @john

      "If the government fails to go ahead with its disability benefit cuts it will" be an excuse for higher taxes is what. Then blame the scrounging sick and the disabled dossers. Meanwhile the rich get more interest on their capital.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 3 hours ago
      @john The taxes should be levied on the high earners by 1% and it should most definitely be levied on corporates such as Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and others to make them pay for their share in order to operate in our markets
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Dez
      · 4 hours ago
      @john I've said since the beginning that this is exactly what the government wants to happen. Have taxpayers and benefit claimants tear into each other so we don't unite and protest and demand they tax their rich buddies.

      I don't have any pity for taxpayers who buy into it, however. They seem to have endless amounts of excuses for not taxing the rich when it's brought up as an alternative but every excuse for going after disabled people just barely getting by because they feel they're losing out. Funny how that works.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Ilo
    · 4 hours ago
    My Tory MP Sir Alec Shelbrooke (who also has a hearing impairment) has announced to his constituency today that he is voting 'YES' to the welfare cuts. I told him what I thought and so did others.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      John
      · 2 hours ago
      @Ilo Shellbrooke the MP who years ago put froward a private members bill to stop paying welfare benefits in cash and instead pay them as credit on a government card that restricts purchases to only essential goods and services. With the aim of stopping feckless welfare claimants wasting taxpayers money on Sky TV, booze, cigs, and scratch cards while their kids go hungry. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Dave Dee
    · 4 hours ago
    If Starmer has to rely on Tory votes to pass this his position will become untenable. The optics of Labour having to rely on the Tories to cut disability benefits will be Starmer's Poll Tax moment. 

    The British public do want a reform of the benefits system but they want disabled people protected, they want people who can work to find work, people who could work to go into avenues opening up that possibility but they want people who truly can't work to be left alone. That is the message I get, completely the opposite of what Labour, Reform or the Tories say. 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Helen Galloway
    · 4 hours ago
    So he’s going to put the pressure on hoping that he gets it through with a few concessions because of the tightened timescale. Oh they are good at this shameless  but the MP’s should also be old hands at it. If he comes the game call his bluff. Because we wouldn’t be getting much more to lose. He  Reeves Kendall and co have though. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Vic
    · 4 hours ago
    What will happen next will be Labour giving tabloid story leaks that if The Benefits reforms dont happen how they want them to will mean workers will pay higher taxes  .
     
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    SLB
    · 5 hours ago
    Sorry, the url on the Ruth Fox reply post should have been : 

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    SLB
    · 5 hours ago
    The IFS have published a report this afternoon about possible concessions.  It says the following:

    There is significant speculation that some of the measures may be scaled back. In this press notice we briefly discuss some of the government’s options.

    Adjust the personal independence payment (PIP) health assessment plans. Under the proposals, as well as scoring at least eight ‘points’ at the PIP health assessment, a claimant must get four or more points on at least one ‘daily living activity’ to receive the daily living element of the benefit. One adjustment would be to reduce the four point requirement to three. Compared to the bill as it stands, this would increase eligibility by 190,000 and spending in 2029–30 by £0.8 billion.

    Protect existing PIP recipients indefinitely. The bill proposes reassessing existing claimants under the tighter system at their next health reassessment, meaning some will lose eligibility. If the tighter system was only applied to new claimants it would increase PIP eligibility by 370,000 and spending by £1.5 billion in 2029–30 compared to the bill as it stands. This would increase the incentive for PIP claimants to remain on PIP, as once they stop claiming it would be harder to restart a claim. In the very long run it would deliver the same savings as the current bill.

    Reduce the cut to the universal credit health element (UCHE) for new claimants. Claimants of universal credit (UC) who cannot work due to ill health receive an extra element in their UC award. Under the bill’s proposals, that amount will be (in today’s prices) £4,620 per year for existing claimants, and £2,370 for new claimants, of which there are expected to be 700,000 by 2029–30. Giving new claimants £3,370 instead would, compared to the bill as it stands, increase incomes for those 700,000 by £1,000 per year and increase overall spending by £700 million in 2029–30 and significantly more once the policy is fully rolled out.

    Increase the UC standard allowance further. The bill increases the UC standard allowance by 4.8% in real terms. Doubling this to 9.6% would increase spending by £1.8 billion, benefiting 6.9 million households (both with and without disabilities).

    Of course, there are numerous other ways in which the system could be made more generous compared to current plans. It is worth noting that under any of these proposals there will still be a substantial additional cut as we enter the 2030s and the package is rolled out further.

    Eduin Latimer, a Senior Research Economist at IFS said:

    “The sharp increase in spending on health-related benefits since the pandemic has left the government with some hard questions. The existing bill is one approach to those challenges – to slow, though not stop, growth in spending on health-related benefits, and to shift support away from recipients of those benefits towards other claimants. Scaling these measures back somewhat would boost support for claimants with health conditions but naturally would require the government to raise taxes or find other savings elsewhere. In any case, if it passes in anything like its current form, the bill will imply larger cuts as we enter the 2030s and more and more claimants are assessed under the new rules.” 

    I think it's important that we tell MPs that reducing the 4 points to 3 points is utterly useless, because there are almost no 3 point descriptors!!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keepingitreal
      · 2 hours ago
      @SLB There is only one three point descriptor, so until the scoring is changed a 3 point rule can't replace a 4 point rule.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Leah
      · 4 hours ago
      @SLB There is one 3 point descriptor that I can see and it involves assistance getting in and out of the shower or bath.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Leah
      · 4 hours ago
      @SLB So all the original points that were raised regarding claimants who need supervision with toileting, help with washing and dressing, they will still lose PIP because they are two point descriptors.

      If MP's objected on this basis, then 3 points does nothing to address this.

      Of course, this may not be one of the concessions yet, but just in case.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 4 hours ago
      @SLB
      Slb - as I trust the B&W site -  I searched it for 3 point descriptors & could find but one

      4. Washing and bathing.
      Needs assistance to be able to get in or out of a bath or shower. 3 points.

      That's it.

      Doh.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    SLB
    · 5 hours ago
    It's been posted here that Ruth Fox from the Hansard Society has called the bill a money bill.  This was on bluesky and reported in the Guardian.  I replied and asked why she thought it was, and she wrote back saying:

    The House of Commons Order Paper says it is expected to be a Money Bill. Ultimately it's the Speaker's judgement and he won't make a decision until the end of proceedings in the Commons so amendments are taken account of. But it's an indicator.

    See 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Slb
    · 5 hours ago
    I know it's been reported here that Ruth Fox from the Hansard Society have said the bill is a money bill.  Other commentators have said it isn't.  Fox's comment come from a post on Bluesky, so I have messaged her there to see if I can get clarification.  I can't promise she  will reply, though!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      James
      · 4 hours ago
      @Slb "A money bill is a bill that in the opinion of the House of Commons Speaker is concerned only with national taxation, public money or loans.

      A bill that is certified as a money bill and which has been passed by the Commons will become law after one month, with or without the approval of the House of Lords, under the terms of the Parliament Acts."

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      john
      · 4 hours ago
      @Slb I think the Speaker decides if it is a Money Bill after the third reading in the Commons, before it then goes to the Lords. The Speaker decides at that point if the bill solely contains matters that are in the remit of the house of Commons financial privilege. As amendments to the bill in the Commons could change what the bill encompasses.

      Even if it is not a Money Bill any amendments put forward by the Lords could be deemed on a individual basis by the Speaker to be within the financial privilege of the Commons if the Lord's amendments are not cost neutral. If within the financial privilege of the Commons the government would decided if to waive privilege and accept the amendment or to use financial privilege to reject the amendment. With no debate in the Commons and any further debate by the Lords on the amendment rendered meaningless.    
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    D
    · 5 hours ago
    From Robert Preston on twitter posted about 4pm today:

    The prime minister’s ambition to listen to his MPs who have concerns about his welfare reforms is not going to plan. One of his Downing St advisers had a meeting today with some of the rebels and resorted to shouting, according to one observer. “Some of my colleagues were in tears” said an MP. “It was completely inappropriate.”
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Frances
      · 2 hours ago
      @D Gosh I wish he'd shouted at me. Tears would not have been my response 😠
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Helen Galloway
      · 4 hours ago
      @D It’s called bullying and they employ them as managers in the Civil Service would be ironic if they end up going sick or resigning bullies like that. I’d stay  to get under their skin 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    shadowpony
    · 5 hours ago
    listen to radio 5live drive today 26 June 2025  from about 16:15, there is a professor of economics on there who absolutely kebabs the government. Professor Joe mitchel. west of england uni Bristol. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gingin
      · 3 hours ago
      @shadowpony Shadow pony- This was brilliant, thanks for this. Well worth a listen everyone 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Neil Cook
      · 4 hours ago
      @shadowpony A serious skewering was clearly called for
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Gingin
    · 6 hours ago
    I've just been invited by a Labour MP to attend the debate on Tuesday and I CAN'T GO. Aaaaaarrrrgg!! Mind you, it could either be a joyous or a terrible occasion...
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gingin
      · 3 hours ago
      @Yorkie Bard I dream of this kind of thing. My daughter’s going to parliament as part of a school trip and I asked if she’d do something similar for me but the most she’ll agree to is sticking out her tongue at cabinet ministers 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 4 hours ago
      @Gingin Gingin - if you find that you could go after all - you could take eggs & rotten tomatoes.

      I could give you one or two suggestions!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    HL
    · 6 hours ago
    Just an idea –

    Is it worth us alerting our MPs / someone in the know in the government to our additional concerns?

    Which are –

    Points 5.4. (a) & (b) – as mentioned in my earlier post (thanks to Angela who originally posted this)

    The NHS diagnosis issue – which has been highlighted by others


  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Joey
    · 6 hours ago
    Just seeing Rachel Reeves’ face makes me angry. I sent her an email when I was a bit angry, however, I stand by it.

    Dear Rachel Reeves,

    Your decision to cut disability benefits just so you can meet your fiscal rules is absolutely disgusting.

    As a citizen of this country, I want to see you out of this job. You do not deserve it.

    To decide to cut the money of vulnerable people, for your own benefit is callous and cruel.

    Do the honourable thing and resign from this position.

    Kind regards,
    Joseph Marsh
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Dee
      · 4 hours ago
      @Joey It's rather polite for an angry email. I like what you wrote. You'll get a generic reply if you're lucky. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 4 hours ago
      @Joey I see we have the down voting interloper on here again today.

      We need to do a "Coleen Rooney" and out them!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Cathedral city
      · 5 hours ago
      @Joey She's pitting claimants against tax payers in the papers this afternoon. She's claiming MPs s vote against the bill on Tuesday, then she'll have to raise taxes.
      MPs are caught between a rock and a hard place, upset claimants or drive away working voters.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    DJ
    · 7 hours ago
    We have got the Torys attempting to use the disabled (whatever the disability) with Labour if Labour do this or do this that and the other that they will vote in favour of the reforms.

    Then you have got labour still persistent with the persecution

    Then there are those who are rebelling against the cuts/reforms

    In a 'nutshell' we are NOT being treated as human beings we are pawns in their political games.

    After the cock up with migration if you are having to migrate with new style ESA (contribution based) with it being deducted £ for £ from UC THEY HAVE ALREADY SENT AND CONTINUING TO SEND US OVER THE EDGE! 

    I think the Speaker of the House his role in this he will be fair 

    As for Starmer and co., there will I daresay be more bribes, trickery and even threats to the rebel MP's!

    I do think that some of the news is positive regarding those MP's who are rebelling

    However, the attitude of the DWP and UC is DISGUSTING and oppressive and they are behaving as if these proposals have already been passed,

    Too much power and control has already been let loose on the sick and disabled and the HARM it has already caused has been done!

    There seems to be more revolt than I imagined which is a positive thing. However, it is NOT over yet !

    So in one way we are winning over a lot of MP's


    PLEASE NOTE MY MP FOR MY AREA IS IN FAVOUR OF THE PROPOSED REFORMS!

    No surprises there, where I live! They are like sheep, every authority baa's to the same hymn sheet to feel that they are accepted! 

    The punishment is BAD if you speak out and tell the brutal truth!

    However, the MP for my area KNOWS that he has more constituents, who are sick and disabled than the wealthy. However, he will 'baa, baa,' to the rest of the authorities in the county who represent very affluent areas. 

    Therefore, I think it is still too soon to even begin to assume if or NOT Labour has succeeded at this stage.

    I agree with Yorkie Bard and his reference to Invective! 



     
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Ilo
      · 4 hours ago
      @DJ Sir Alec Shelbrooke, my Tory MP, has announced today to his constituency that he is voting 'YES' to there welfare cuts. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Gingin
    · 7 hours ago
    From the Guardian. Based on these comments it appears this is now a money bill:    

    Why timetable for welfare bill leaves very little time for amendments to be agreed
    The timetable for the UC and Pip bill announced by Lucy Powell at business questions today (see 11.18am) has important consequences for the Labour MPs who want to see it amended. Ruth Fox, director of the Hansard Society, explains them here in a thread on Bluesky.

    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.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      sara
      · 2 hours ago
      @Slb The pip eligibility change isn't purely financial.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 4 hours ago
      @maggie No, no maggie - far, far from it!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Gingin
      · 4 hours ago
      @SLB Thanks for doing this SLB, it’s so confusing 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 4 hours ago
      @Neil Cook No, no Neil Cook - far, far from it!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Yorkie Bard
      · 4 hours ago
      @Slb I am sure that you're right Slb
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    D
    · 7 hours ago
    From the guardian uk politics live text:

    Why timetable for welfare bill leaves very little time for amendments to be agreed
    The timetable for the UC and Pip bill announced by Lucy Powell at business questions today (see 11.18am) has important consequences for the Labour MPs who want to see it amended. Ruth Fox, director of the Hansard Society, explains them here in a thread on Bluesky.

    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.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Slb
      · 5 hours ago
      @D Not as far as I'm aware, and I haven't seen any concrete info that the govt thinks it is.  It most likely would be if the pip eligibility rules were chopped out, though.  

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      D
      · 7 hours ago
      @D If I’ve understood this correct the gov intend for this bill to become a money bill and they want the last 3 common stages (committee, report and 3rd reading) to be complete just one week after the 2nd reading vote next Tuesday

      So many question like has the speaker given the approval for this to become a money bill yet?

      And why is no one around the internet talking about Labour gov trying the dirty with rapid fast forward tricks

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Marc
    · 7 hours ago
    No concessions.
    Sack the bill
    Sack the PM

    Start again.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Marc
      · 5 hours ago
      @The RealHenrySugar Starmer is finished, be it this year or after next year's elections, it makes no odds. His position is completely untenable. It's hardly a controversial prediction either.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Marc
      · 5 hours ago
      @dais .+* I know exactly how it works, thank you. Starmer is a goner. Get used to the idea.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      The RealHenrySugar
      · 5 hours ago
      @dais .+* He has a point though. These complacent, arrogant millionaires conveniently forget 95% of the time that we are supposed to be their bosses. Including all of us here and many more, most of whom have paid into the system while working and become ill through no fault of our own, and who Starmer thinks he can throw under the bus as part of some bizarre and unrealistic "moral crusade" which only he seems to comprehend. Along with the likes of Rupert Murdoch, one of the uber-rich Starmer is nauseatingly sychophantic to, who can have no possible comprehension of the feeling of being very ill and having not enough money just to ensure basic survival.

      He absolutely should be sacked; he is a traitor to many of the people who voted for him, who wanted "Change" from 14 years of self-serving Tory heartache, panic and trauma. And as in the Labour party where that mechanism doesn't exist, he should be forced to resign and take the quite delusional Reeves and Kendall with him.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      dais .+*
      · 6 hours ago
      @Marc not how it works Marc. please do some research for your own sake
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Snuggles
    · 7 hours ago
    So Starmer doesn't like the way the list is growing and the way the vote may go, so he can just turn round and say the vote won't happen until September? It's absolutely disgusting if this happens it's more worry for the disabled and a way for him to tell the MPs how to vote. I will never vote for liebour ever again and I hold my head in shame. At least my MP is on the list Gareth Snell. I hope he would after all the emails I have sent him.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Yorkie Bard
    · 7 hours ago
    An interesting 4 minute watch from the BBC.

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

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

 
iContact

Latest news

We use cookies

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential for the operation of the site, while others help us to improve this site and the user experience (tracking cookies). You can decide for yourself whether you want to allow cookies or not. Please note that if you reject them, you may not be able to use all the functionalities of the site.

Ok Decline
More about cookies