Chancellor Rachel Reeves told Channel 4 yesterday that she “can’t leave welfare untouched”, as speculation mounts that additional costs will be added to the Motability scheme.

In the interview Reeves said  ‘You know we’ve now committed to doing reform in a different way, but we can’t leave welfare untouched.

‘We can’t get to the end of this Parliamentary session and I’ve basically done nothing.

‘Because if more and more of our money that we spend as a government is spent on welfare, you’ve got less for the NHS, you’ve got less on schools and you have to put more on people’s taxes.’

Reeves gave no details of what she intended.

But the press have been briefed that the chancellor is considering ending exemption from VAT and insurance tax premiums for Motability cars.  Whilst this would not reduce the benefits bill in any way, it would increase the amount of tax paid by claimants using the Motability scheme.  This could result in around £1 billion a year in extra revenue for the government.

The possibility of removing luxury car brands such as BMW and Mercedes from the scheme is also being considered, as the inclusion of these vehicles causes such outrage in some sections of the press.

More details about what the Chancellor has planned may not emerge until the budget on 26 November.

You can watch the Channel 4 interview here.

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.
    · 19 days ago
    I had a motobily vehicle for 3yrs extended to 5yrs. To be honest, as nice as it was having a brand new car for that period doing the maths it really worked out more expensive than buying a quality used vehicle.  Including deposit it cost approx £24000 over the period. With a £900 good condition repayment.  Realistically, if I had financed a used vehicle for the same amount, I would have a vehicle with a trade in value of approx £6000. Doing only 6000 miles a year do I really need  a £40000 car sitting on the drive simply because I can.  Having said that its a wonderful scheme and can give mobility with affordability to those in need.



    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @John Please note upon return of Motability Cecile any adaptions have to be rectified back to the norm and paid for by the Motability claimant 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Tony Frost I think motability includes the car being adapted for disabled use, insurance, breakdown cover, servicing and maintenance. Making it less hassle and stress for some people. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 19 days ago
    The ultimate proof of the existence of cosmic karma would be Reeves being run over by a Motability car, having to apply for disability benefits and then being told that she's not disabled enough to qualify. Which, for legal reasons, I hope doesn't happen.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @tintack
      Ohh I don't know, we live in Orwellian times.  Starmer the Harmer may well send the thought police around to have some double-speak with you!

      Good luck with the surgery, wishing you a safe and successful OP and a fast recovery!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Alprocherry
      "obviously we don’t want anyone to get hurt"

      We certainly don't. Oh no. Definitely not. Alas, many of our politicians do not seem to reciprocate that sentiment.

      "but thank you for that tintack, it did strike a chord!"

      Glad you liked it!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Mick
      "Obviously it was meant as a tongue in cheek, hypothetical, comedic post and not as a threat, or actually wanting that scenario to happen."

      I won't be posting anything for a bit, but this is because I'm travelling to hospital tomorrow for major (and unfortunately risky) spinal surgery on Thursday. It definitely won't be because I've been arrested by anti-terrorism police. Not unless being a callous hater of sick and disabled people has now become a protected characteristic......good evening officer.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @tintack Yes, obviously we don’t want anyone to get hurt- but thank you for that tintack, it did strike a chord!


    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Sam
      I get what you're saying and largely do agree.  Be the bigger person, adult in the room, treat others as you would like to be treated, don't lower yourself and stoop to their level and all that.

      However, 'Do unto others as they do unto you' and 'what's good for the goose is good for the gander' etc. Also comes to mind.

      Obviously it was meant as a tongue in cheek, hypothetical, comedic post and not as a threat, or actually wanting that scenario to happen.  It also has merit as a real example of the sort of thing that can and, does happen to people everyday.  It could happen to anyone, anytime.  This is what people who are against disabled people and the welfare system need to realise and understand.

      It is no joke what these politicians have set up and allowed to happen in the welfare system and the country generally already at the expense of ill and disabled people.  Their ongoing  mistreatment, disdain, division, rhetoric and outright attacks, hatred and lies have and, continue to do to ill and disabled people are not just coming from them, it is enabling and emboldening the far right, brainwashing the masses into hate and division, giving a blame license to them.

      Showing through a post, such as tintack has, with humour, the reality of the system and what it does to people, spells it out and shows just how unfair, inhumane, wicked and sick it all is.  Politicians, the media, the public, the whole country needs to know, to see and hear and try pausing and thinking.  Put themselves or their loved ones in that situation and see how they would feel, how it would affect them, what they would want and rightly expect if it did happen.  How would they live, survive and thrive under those circumstances?  Maybe if they truly thought about or experienced the lived reality, the nightmare, then this country would be a better and much nicer caring place.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    The government are just trying to make savings at what are considered easy targets and the comment about being less for NHS and schools is just trying to make non disabled people resent the disabled.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    I do think something needs to be done. Remember these cars are VAT exempt and road fund exempt as well. Also people on mobility part of PIP get discount or exemption from road fund as well. 

    That can be a saving of over £750 per year  and over 5k for the first year for some cars and because it is about polluting and emissions this does seem unfair. 

    I think the lowest level of road tax should be exempt then you top up and pay the rest. This will stop people getting exemption on big polluting vehicles. And at the same time put money back into the road.

    Over 815000 vehicles on the scheme that is alot of money and have you seen the state of the roads?

    It's all about fairness and I agree to an extent however I picked my last car based on running costs and emissions it's not fair if someone can go out and buy a land rover without any tax consequence regarding the environment including first year discount just because they get PIP. 

    There are many cars large enough and suitable within the lowest tax bracket.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Crumpet My car has to be suitable for my needs, suitable for my 6'4" husband who has to the longer distance driving and also big enough to fit my wheelchair and hoist. It came down to 3 options that had a low enough advance payment to be affordable (and no, non of them were Land Rovers). I was glad that I didn't also have to take road tax bracket into consideration as just getting that far was enough of a headache!
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Motability operations is owned and managed by the 4 big banks. The banks make what they call a ‘modest’ return.The scheme props up the ailing used car market. 
    When leases expire, the profits from sales are used to finance grants for adaptations.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Anon To get an adaption grant is almost impossible for a car you like.
      I am in a wheelchair but they will only give me a grant for my adaption needs is if i choose from a certain few that  they decide is suitable.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    100billion interest paid to bond holders every year,  thats the ACTUAL problem.

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @james Bonds are used to create money by borrowing by government. so !
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    The trouble with this ridiculous Motability idea is that it will increase the upfront payments beyond the reach of disabled people. My most recent vehicle, a basic Peugeot van adapted to carry my powerchair, had a £5k upfront payment that I only managed to find by saving up my mobility allowance and adding it to a small inheritance. 

    I won't get another inheritance, and I can't save my mobility allowance because every penny is now paid out to Motability. How in God's name do they expect people on means tested benefits to find even £5k, let alone £5k plus VAT? The stupidity of it just leaves me speechless. People go on about so-called free cars, they always fail to mention that "free" actually means having to pay thousands for a vehicle you don't even own.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 days ago
      @Fionn Yes, I've just worked out that my 'free' car will cost me more than £15000 over 3 years, with nothing to show for it at the end of the term (in fact, I will have to pay to have the hoist removed and the boot 'made good' if I decide not to continue with Motability after that).
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Fionn I agree 100%.
      They are making millions in profits from us.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Nobody seems to be drawing attention to the fact that if you want anything other than the basic model, you have to pay extra. Nobody is getting a brand new Merc unless they're paying extra. Why isn't the supposedly independent preaa pointing that out?
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    I agree with this to some extent, the luxury cars are not justifiable to any user of the scheme. Larger cars and adaptations absolutely essential, but who really needs a flash Mercedes/BMW/Audi etc who then flashes it all over social media (like someone I know!) behaviours like this is what causes the hatred towards claimants. The scheme should be limited to the standard model of any vehicle, which is perfectly fine for someone who needs a vehicle to help in their day to day lives. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 days ago
      @Anon Are you also opposed to non-disabled people buying luxury cars? I don't have any car but I don't think luxuries should only be for non-disabled people. If disabled people can afford luxuries, why shouldn't they be allowed to?
      Do you mean that disabled people who can afford luxury cars shouldn't be entitled to PIP i.e. are you arguing for means-testing PIP?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Janine Fully agree they are paying from their allowances so I don't know where the concept of free comes into it. Without it people would either be home bound or using expensive taxis! Jealousy is the reason. We have turned into a society of envy and hate driven by twitter, Facebook, and the daily fail, the sun, the star, and all the other tabloids who are profiting from advertisements at the expense of the weak and sick! 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @Anon Oh don't worry hate is what drives the social media companies to profits. People will always find someone or the other to hate and be envious over. I would gladly trade my disabilities in exchange for good health any day
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Sean I completely agree with everything that you have said. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @John Well said, Unfortunately like most people there quick to judge and seem to have the image of a disabled person not allowed to have anything nice in life... people forget having a disability is hard enough being judged, not treated equal,  not being able to work or conduct our selves the same, no person is the same but if you put a disabled person and non disabled person for work, who would they choose. I feel judged every where I go its horrible. And a disabled car isn't seen as a luxury for disabled its actually the reduced stress elimination and easyness for us to be able to travel. If those who want a nicer car want to pay thats there choice, people forget aswell we lease the car and have to return them after 3 years. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    We need to keep punching down. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    “Disabled people cost too much money” is what I’m taking from this
    Ffs Rachel reeves 🤦🏼 She thinks her job as Chancellor is to cut welfare, she doesn’t want to leave it “untouched”
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    There is a robust response to this from “funding the future” from today. Exactly what we are all thinking and no doubt feeling.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    So Motability may lose its exemption from.
    20% VAT on vehicle lease payments.
    12% Insurance premium tax.
    And may pass on those costs to the Motability scheme users.
    Possibly raising the cheapest vehicles from all of users PIP enhanced rate mobility component, to an additional about £14 a week on top of that. If taken as a upfront payment like the current scheme appears to do that would make Motability unaffordable, as over a 3 year lease agreement that would be an upfront payment of £2,184.
    Is Motability supposed to find vehicles that cost thousands of pounds less to buy in the first place? So the scheme can offset the cost of the taxes and people can continue to pay the same as they do now.

    Will Motability also be losing its VAT exemption from vehicle purchases and resale. Further hitting the viability of the scheme. As it relies on being able to offset the lease costs by being able to resell the vehicles to recoup some of the cost of the original purchase of the vehicles.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 20 days ago
      @John Another half baked idea.... is the motability scheme not practically single handedly holding up the new car market in the UK? 

      I think they need to stop looking of their shoulder at reform and actually start helping people.... its nearly like this parliament was designed to be the most polarising bar brexit, I dont believe ive ever seen a government throw away such a majority inside 12months its shameful.

      Anyone would think this was the PLAN to make Reform more palatable......

      Liz Truss all over again..... smoke n mirrors.... its not what u can see it what you can't....
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 20 days ago
    Maybe the best thing she could do as a compromise, is too freeze benefits for the remainder of the parliament.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 days ago
      @hrh I haven't forgotten the fact that my beneifits won't go up. they really didn't like sdp did they?
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 18 days ago
      @Biscuit There where winners and losers when people moved form ESA to UC.

      The winners were those in ESA support group or on PIP daily living component who were not also on severe disability premium.

      The losers were those also receiving severe disability premium.
      Also losers due to a previous change were those in the ESA work related activity group.
      Also losers were a small group whose rent support entailment changed due to some differences between the rules for Housing Benefit and UC housing support.
      The above losers got transitional protection so their benefit is frozen. As transitional protection is for the whole amount of UC including housing costs, they will end up worse off not just due to inflation but also due to rent increases.

      Also losers were those who due to the change from ESA to UC had their council tax reduction reduced or their local authority care costs increased due to the postcode local authority scheme rules.
      These losers ended up immediately worse off as they did not get transitional protection for these changes in entitlement. 

    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Denby and let the triple lock run away? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @hrh I am £116 a month better off on Universal Credit than on ESA.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 19 days ago
      @Denby she has frozen benefits for all migrating from employment support allowance to universal credit as if entitled to transitional protection this wont attract any inflation rises until it is the same as universal credit. This huge saving seems to have been forgotten …