The second reading of the Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill begins at 1.40pm today.

The vote is expected at 7.00pm

You can watch the debate live on parliament tv here.

We won’t be giving a blow-by-blow account of the debate, but you are welcome to comment on proceedings below the line.


You can see a full list of the votes on the second reading here.  49 Labour MPs rebelled.


The vote on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill second reading is:  For 335.  Against 260.  A majority in favour of the bill of 75.


Here is the list of which MPs voted for and against the amendment.


The vote on the rebel amendment has now been held.  149 in favour of the bill being dropped without a second reading, 328 against.  This means the amendment has failed and there will now be a vote on the actual bill itself.


4-point PIP rule is gone

The 4-point PIP rule is effectively dead as Labour makes its biggest concession yet.  Timms has just told the House:  "I can announce that we are going to remove the clause five from the bill at committee, that we will move straight to the wider review, sometimes referred to as the Timms review, and only make changes to Pip eligibility, activities and descriptors following that review."

Clause 5 is the 4-point rule, so that is now gone.  Instead, the Timms review will decide what happens to PIP.  And if, as Labour have promised, the review is genuinely coproduced with disabled people there is very little chance of such a rule ever happening.  And if Labour did try to force it into the review decision they would be likely to face an even worse rebellion than the one they have just suffered,

This seems to mean that the main purpose of the bill is now to take money from future recipients of the UC health element and to introduce the severe conditions criteria.


Jessica Elgot of the Guardian is reporting on Bluesky that the government are considering more concessions whilst Arj Sigh of the i paper says crisis talks between Angela Rayner and the rebels on changes to PIP rules being put off until after Timms has carried out his review.


Rachel Maskell's reasoned amendment has been selected by the speaker for a vote.  This is the rebel amendment which has 39 Labour signatures. It will be voted on at the end of the dabate.  If it doesn't pass then MPs will vote on the main bill.


Debbie Abrahams, chair of the Commons work and pensions committee has confirmed this afternoon that she will "not be supporting the bill".


Given that the new amendment calling for the bill not to have a second reading got only 39 Labour signatures, most media commentators are predicting that Labour will get the bill though, though by a relatively narrow margin.  More than just these 39 Labour MPs are expected to vote against or abstain.

But the reality is that nobody can be certain, because the rebels are not a unified group and much may depend on whether Liz Kendall makes a better job of today’s proceedings than she did of yesterday’s.

 

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    From Andy burham on twitter an hr ago:

    Whatever people’s views about the concessions, surely everyone can see the process here is ALL wrong?

    Third Reading in eight days?

    A timetable like that diminishes the role of MPs in getting this legislation right, shuts out disabled people and puts too many at risk.


    Sums it up really
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @D The government know this bill won’t stand up to scrutiny. A bill that isn’t fit for scrutiny isn’t fit to become law.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    Is there any hint to in which way the tories will vote? Does anyone still hold out hope the vote will go our way with so many rebels caving in? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 16 hours ago
      @Kevin. Bad Enoch officially says they'll be voting against.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    John Glen Conservative MP seems to imply that with some ‘resilience ‘ those receiving PIP due to mental health would not need it the payment.  He does not agree that the attempt to have parity between mental and physical health in benefits worked. Does he not realise that PIP can help people stay in work?  I wonder if Mind would agree with this? Does he believe mental health issues are not as debilitating as physical ones? 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 15 hours ago
      @Jane63 And yet suicide is the biggest killer of people under the age of 35 in the UK, shows how little John Glen and those that try to diminish mental health really understand.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    When Esther McVey calls your proposals "morally unacceptable", you know you're in trouble.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 16 hours ago
    Watching the COVID enquiry module today evidence submitted on the social care sector and the other contributory factors, reveals the inadequate response to COVID, for those who died, those left with disabilities, and should assist those in government who don't yet understand the failings that have led to the increase in benefits requirement, let alone all other health and disability disadvantages and failings of support.

    People were damaged by those systemic failings.

    It is not right factually or morally to suggest increases are due to fraud, or an easier route.

    Post pandemic ill health is recognised, after the influenza pandemic after WW 1.  Post viral illness can be extremely debilitating and life long.  It can impact the heart, the lungs, and immune system but many other things also.

    The government needs to recognise it's responsibility in helping to create more ill health, due to deep seated failings, lack of provision and poor decision making.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    “Darling says the Lib Dems are supporting the Maskell amendment.

    He says some of the comments from Labour high command about the bill, such as Keir Starmer’s reference to “noises off”, have been concerning.

    And he says it is “shameful” the way the bill is being rushed through. “We all know that rushed bills are poor bills,” he says.

    He says he is particularly concerned that the bill will create a “two-tier system”, with existing claimants getting more generous benefits than new claimants.

    This two-tier approach to this system is wrong, and I and the Liberal Democrats have grave concerns that this is unBritish, it’s unjust …
    We’ve heard from the minister saying it’s been done before. But that doesn’t make it right. It is almost Orwellian that we will be having a system where in our law, we say that all disabled people are equal, but some are more equal than others.”
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    I think the government will go down over this.
    Deliberate harm to the most vulnerable.
    Unforgivable.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Basically they are live streaming their own political demise.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    “Maskell says even at this 11th hour she would still ask the government to withdraw the bill.

    She says there should be a proper consultation instead.

    There is a reason why we are a dystopian state of excessive wealth and abject poverty. It is because governments focus on what they value most, and for these [disabled] people, they never get the attention.
    She says disabled people want reform. But not by this bill.

    She ends:

    As Nelson Mandela said, may your choices reflect your hopes, not your fears.”
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Rachael Maskell - BRILLANT WORDS!
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 hours ago
      @Yorkie Bard Absolutely brilliant, she spoke from the heart and with passion.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Watching Rachel maskell nearly bought me to tears. What a wonderful, kind and compassionate person. If only there were more like her. 😔
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Rachael Maskell is amazing! Has bought me to tears. I wish she would be listened to. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Brilliant speech by Rachel Maskell that shows the moral bankruptcy of this government and it's bill
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Rachael Maskell Will be on LBC radio from 1pm Wednesday 2nd July 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Kemi Badenoch coming out and saying that the TaxPayers' Alliance have come out and done their own "impact assessment" into how people with acne and food intolerance get PIP in an attempt to paint claimants as fraudsters is so laughable. Yes, because they're a completely non-biased and fair source, aren't they?

    Of course a group dedicated to "speaking for ordinary taxpayers fed up with government waste" is going to come up with every conceivable reason to try and justify why welfare is a waste of money and why disabled people should get vouchers or just one-off payments like the Tories have suggested. 

    You may as well ask the KKK to do an "impact assessment" into racism.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 hours ago
      @Anon "The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

      John Kenneth Galbraith
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 hours ago
      @Dez The TaxPayers' Alliance is about as dodgy as right-wing organisations come. They claim to speak for "ordinary taxpayers" when - in fact - they advocate for privatisation across the board because who they represent are far from ordinary, working class people who depend on public services. 

      They represent the rich and the privileged and that's why Badenoch fell back on them as a source. They have and always will feed into Tory ideology when it comes to public spending, which is that if you're poor and can't afford anything (even if you're working), you shouldn't get anything because that's at 'the expense of the taxpayer'. Even though said taxpayers also benefit from these public services. Because you never hear about those who say they can afford private healthcare opting to go private as opposed to using NHS services. Outside of convenience, anyway.

      It's just funny how Badenoch seems to think that the public don't have the means to look up these jokers and find all this out via their own Wikipedia article. 

      Having a bias doesn't even begin to cover it.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    I guess Starmer & Kendall, must had got the beating sticks out to crush the majority of this rebellion.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    She’s added to yesterday’s possible 3 tier benefits system,
     
    “Kendall says, when Timms review Pip rules apply, claimants judged under post-November 2026 rules can ask for reassessment
    Kendall says the government wants to complete the Timms review by next autumn. And after that its recommendations will be implemented “as soon as is practically possible via primary or secondary legislation”.

    And she says that, once those recommendations are in place, any people already getting Pip can ask for a reassessment.

    (That means, if the Timms rules are more generous than the rules coming in in November 2026, people can migrate to the Timms rules by asking for a review of their case. This point in part addresses the “three-tier system” claim made yesterday.)”
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Watching this, it's no wonder why the country is in a mess.  Kendall sounds like a bad preacher, and Badenoch sounds like a school bully.  Both are utterly incompetent.  We have a govt in chaos and no competent opposition to hold them to account.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      · 17 hours ago
      @Slb Slb I think Kendall sounds more like a primary school teacher, with a sing-song voice
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    She’s now changed what she said yesterday, however can we believe anything she says now,

     “Kendall confirms existing Pip claimants will be reassessed under current rules, even after Novermber 2026
    Kendall confirms that the government has abandoned the original plans to apply the new Pip eligibility rules to existing claimants.

    Clive Betts (Lab) asks why the government is changing the eligility rules in November 2026, when the Timms review of the Pip assessment may not have finished.”

  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    · 17 hours ago
    Do you believe her!

    “Kendall says Pip claimants with fluctuating conditions could be treated as being so disabled they can never return to work
    In response to an intervention from Jim Shannon, a DUP MP, Kendall says that, even if a Pip claimant has a fluctuating condition, they can still qualify as being covered by the severe conditions criteria, which applies to people whose disability is so bad they can never go back to work. Under the bill, people in this group will not face regular reassessments.” 

Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

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

 
iContact
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.