Early evening summary
Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, has faced down angry Labour MPs to unveil drastic cuts to the UK’s benefits system that will leave many sick and disabled claimants worse off. We have a summary of what is being proposed here, written by Jessica Elgot.
Downing Street has rejected David Lammy’s assessment that Israel has broken international law by blocking aid to Gaza, in a rare public censure for the foreign secretary. Later, in an interview today with Bloomberg, Lammy said that he “could have been clearer” when speaking to MPs, suggesting he should not have said Israel was definitely in breach of international law because that was a matter for a court to decide. He said:
Ultimately of course these are matters for the courts to determine but it’s difficult to see how denying humanitarian assistance to a civilian population can be compatible with international humanitarian law.
A review will consider reducing the “volume of assessment” at GCSE following concerns about the pressure that exams can place on pupils in England, PA Media reports. PA says the interim report of the independent curriculum and assessment review has said it will consider whether the English Baccalaureate (EBacc) – a government performance measure for schools in England – remains “effective”. The review said it will ensure the curriculum is “inclusive” so children can see themselves represented in their learning and to help challenge discrimination.
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, has accused Kemi Badenoch of “hypocrisy” over net zero because she is now saying she is opposed to having 2050 as a net zero target when she did not object when MPs debated the plan in 2019. (See 11.47am.)
We all make mistakes – even the Institute for Fiscal Studies. It has just sent out an email saying it got a figure wrong in its previous release (see 4.28pm). It says there are about 600,000 people who currently get the health element of universal credit (UC) but who do not get Pip (the personal independence payment) who would be worse off by £2,400 a year from 2028-29, not 900,000 people as they originally said. I have corrected the original post.
Charity says it is worried impact disability benefit cuts could have on carers
The Carers Trust says it is worried that people claiming carer’s allowance could lose out because of the cuts announced today. Carer’s allowance, which is worth £81.90 a week, is paid to people who spent at least 35 hours a week voluntarily caring for someone. To be eligible, the person they are looking for must be getting a disability benefit, like Pip (the personal independence payment).
Kirsty McHugh, the trust’s CEO, said:
Proposals to tighten eligibility criteria for benefits will strike fear into the heart of many carers. Around half a million carers look after someone receiving personal insurance payments (Pip), and nearly 150,000 people rely on both Pip and Carer’s Allowance. Disabled people and their carers are already among the most vulnerable in our society and more likely to live in poverty. Reducing their access to a financial safety net could push them over the edge.
Two left-leaning thinktanks has issued statements criticising the proposed disability benefit cuts.
Tom Pollard, head of social policy at the New Economic Foundation, says:
The cuts to benefits announced today have clearly been designed to meet a savings target imposed by the Chancellor’s arbitrary and self-imposed fiscal rules, rather than ensuring ill and disabled people get the support they need. Cutting the income of those who need support will not address the underlying factors leading to more people becoming unwell and disabled, it will only make them worse.
And Paul Kissack, chief executive at the Joseph Rowentree Foundation, says:
No truly moral choice would leave disabled people without the very support that is designed to allow them to lead a dignified life, nor would it leave them facing hardship. These would be unprecedented disability benefits cuts.
Ideas like the Right to Try Guarantee help to remove the barriers that prevent people from working but enormous cuts mean the Government risks undermining these positives. Making it harder for people to qualify for support, or cutting their support, puts more pressure on people who are already struggling to cope.
Britons, including Tory supporters, back net zero by 2050 policy, poll suggests, as Badenoch says it's impossible
This morning Kemi Badenoch gave a speech saying that reaching net zero by 2050 is impossible. (See 10.47am.) But YouGov has published polling suggesting that 61% of people support the commitment, and only 24% of people are opposed. Even among Conservative supporters, 52% are in favour.
While Kemi Badenoch has branded net zero by 2050 "impossible", 61% of Britons and 52% of Tory voters say they support the commitment - although this figure has fallen in recent years
— YouGov (@YouGov) March 18, 2025
Support: 61% (-10 from Jul 2023)
Oppose: 24% (+8) pic.twitter.com/JM8TsnVDkb
Up to 1.2m people could lose between £4k and £6k per year by 2029 from Pip changes, Resolution Foundation says
The Resolution Foundation has also put out a statement about the benefit cuts. It says the changes to the rules for Pip (the personal independent payment) could cost up to 1.2 million people between £4,200 and £6,300. It says:
The main savings are to be achieved through restricting entitlement to Pip - a benefit that is paid regardless of whether someone is in work, to compensate for the additional costs of being disabled.
The foundation says that if the government plans to save £5 billion from restricting Pip by making it harder to qualify for the ‘daily living’ component, this would mean between 800,000 and 1.2 million people losing support of between £4,200 and £6,300 per year by 2029-30.
With seven-in-ten Pip claimants living in families in the poorest half of the income distribution, these losses will be heavily concentrated among lower-income households. This looks like a short-term ‘scored’ savings exercise, rather than a long-term reform, says the foundation, given that ministers have also said they will look again at how Pip is assessed in the future.
The foundation also says up to four million families will benefit from general universal credit becoming a bit more generous- but only by around £3 per week.
Louise Murphy, a senior economist at the foundation, said:
Around one million people are potentially at risk of losing support from tighter restrictions on PIP, while young people and those who fall ill in the future will lose support from a huge scaling back of incapacity benefits.
The irony of this health and disability green paper is that the main beneficiaries are those without health problems or a disability. And while it includes some sensible reforms, too many of the proposals have been driven by the need for short-term savings to meet fiscal rules, rather than long-term reform. The result risks being a major income shock for millions of low-income households.
Updated
Around 600,000 people now getting UC sickness top-up could lose £2,400 a year from 2028-29 under reforms, IFS says
The government has not yet published its impact assessment that will show how many people will be affected by the cuts to sickness and disability benefits announced today. That will come out next week, alongside the spring statement.
But the Institute for Fiscal Studies has published an analysis that does give some figures for the number of people likely to be affected. Here are the key numbers.
The IFS says that about 600,000 people who currently get the health element of universal credit (UC) – top-up payments because they are sick (see 12.27pm) – but who do not get Pip (the personal independence payment) would be worse off by £2,400 a year from 2028-29. That’s because the new rules imply they would lose the top-up, it says.
There are 2.4 million families getting the UC health top-up would get £280 less a year from 2028-9, the IFS says. That is because the top-up will become less valuable.
The other 4.5 million familes on UC would be £150 a year better of from 2028-29, the IFS. That is because that element will become more valuable.
People claiming the UC top-up for the first time under these rules will get £2,500 a year less under the new system than they would have done under the old one, the IFS says.
The IFS also says that the changes are designed to incentivise more sick and disabled people into work. But it says some of the measures could be counter-productive. By linking receipt of the UC health top-up to claiming Pip, the new rules could encourage even more people to apply for Pip. And, by increasing the value of basic UC, that could reduce the incentive for people on it to get a job, the IFS says.
Commenting on the plans, Tom Waters, an associate director at IFS said:
This package is a fundamental break from the past few decades of welfare policy. The increase in basic out-of-work support, while not very large, is the biggest permanent real terms rise since at least 1980. With it is promised even higher support in the period shortly after job loss in the form of contribution-based unemployment insurance.
At the same time the health-related benefit system will be tightened, cut, and entitlement will no longer depend upon whether you can work or not.
The hope is more employment and fewer people in the disability and incapacity benefit system.
The risk is that it’s precisely the individuals receiving health-related benefits that are least responsive to financial incentives to work, and perhaps most in need of extra financial support.
UPDATE: The headline, and the sentence after the first bullet point, have been changed to say there are 600,000 people who get top-up UC but not Pip who would lose £2,400 from 2028-29, not 900,000. The IFS made a mistake in its original statement, but has now corrected it.
Updated
Government launches consultation on ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting
Aamna Mohdin is the Guardian’s community affairs correspondent.
The government has opened a consultation on the proposed equality (race and disability) bill, which would require companies with 250 or more employees to report on ethnicity and disability pay gaps. Officials say the move aims to improve workplace transparency and tackle pay disparities.
WeCalibrate, a diversity advocacy group, welcomed the proposal, citing a survey of 10,000 UK workers where over 77% supported broader pay gap reporting.
Jinan Younis, WeCalibrate’s founder, said:
Pay gap reporting isn’t just a compliance issue, it’s a trust issue. We encourage organisations to listen carefully to their staff, and consider how increased reporting could enhance trust within their organisations.
The consultation comes amid concerns about a backlash against diversity initiatives in the UK. Last week, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced it would halt further DEI regulatory improvements.
Reboot, a campaign group championing DEI in the financial services sector, criticised the decision. The founder, Noreen Biddle Shah, said:
Throughout 2024, we observed growing resistance to DEI initiatives, driven by geopolitical instability, rising populism, and financial pressures fuelling ESG fatigue. The FCA’s decision risks reinforcing this trend, despite clear evidence that employees across the sector overwhelmingly support greater action.
The disconnect between regulatory decisions and workforce sentiment is striking.
Updated
Oxfam says No 10's decision to disown Lammy's comment about Israel breaking international law in Gaza 'appalling'
Turning away from the welfare cuts for a moment, Oxfam has described No 10’s decision to over-rule David Lammy, and disown his comment about Israel being in breach of international law by blocking aid to Gaza, as “appalling”.
As Kiran Stacey reports, the No 10 declaration in effect saying Lammy was wrong came at the morning lobby briefing. (See 12.13pm.)
In response Oxfam’s chief executive, Halima Begum, said:
Israel has been committing non-stop violations of international law in Gaza and the West Bank for over a year; including most recently blocking all aid into Gaza, collectively punishing over two million people who are already living in apocalyptic conditions. These war crimes have been televised and reported by countless organisations and legal bodies, from the UN to the International Court of Justice.
Today of all days, when Israel has resumed its illegal bombing campaign and forced displacement orders on Palestinians in Gaza, for the government to row back on the foreign secretary’s words is nothing short of appalling. The UK government must condemn these crimes in the strongest terms immediately and stop its complicity in this catastrophic crisis.
By contrast, the Conservative party issued a statement implying that Lammy was equating Israel with Hamas. Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, said:
David Lammy’s absolute focus should be on securing the release of the 59 remaining hostages held by Hamas since the atrocities of October 7 2023 … Labour should be clear that there is no moral equivalence between Hamas and the democratically elected government of Israel, and we must have no more poorly judged decisions on arms exports designed to placate Labour backbenchers.
Updated
TUC urges government to 'reconsider' scale of proposed disability benefit cuts
Trade unions have also criticised the disability benefit cuts.
Paul Nowak, the TUC general secretary, said:
While we welcome the decision not to freeze PIP, this package will still lead to significant cuts in entitlements for some disabled people.
As well as ensuring that those with the most severe disabilities are protected, we urge ministers to reconsider the scale of proposed cuts in disabled people’s incomes.
Disabled people who are unable to work must not be pushed further into hardship.
Sharon Graham, the Unite general secretary, said:
The government is in danger of making the wrong choices. We must be protecting the most vulnerable in society and not pitting the poorest against the poorest.
Before cutting benefits, the government should be introducing a wealth tax, so that the very wealthiest in society begin paying their fair share.
And Daniel Kebede, general secretary of the National Education Union, said:
Fifty per cent of children with a disabled parent live in poverty. Taking away from disabled adults pushes their children deeper into poverty. And, more than any other factor, poverty impairs the life chances of children.
Eighty-four per cent of NEU members have told us they often see children fatigued due to the impact of living in poverty. It is now commonplace to find food banks in schools and teachers feeding children from their own pockets. This already dreadful situation will now only become worse.
Here is the Department for Work and Pensions’ news release with its summary of the plans announced today.
And here is the text of Liz Kendall’s statement in the Commons.
Disability benefit cuts 'will send even more families to food banks', says Citizens Advice
Like the disability charities (see 1.51pm), welfare and anti-poverty charities are also alarmed at the potential impact of cuts. Here are some of their comments.
From Helen Barnard, director of policy at Trussell, the food bank charity
We’re deeply concerned by the cuts announced to disability payments today. People at food banks have told us they are terrified of how they might survive.
From Child Poverty Action Group’s chief executive Alison Garnham
The prime minister’s vital commitment to improved living standards for all would be shattered if disabled people are left behind. Children in a household where someone has a disability already have a higher risk of poverty and further cuts would only make life harder for many of these families.
The government’s forthcoming child poverty strategy must prioritise investing in the social security system, including by scrapping the two child limit, and it would be undermined by cuts that take support away from people who need it and risk pushing yet more children and families into poverty.
From Oxfam’s domestic poverty lead Silvia Galandini
After the recent slashing of international aid, the government’s plans to cut £5bn in support for people living with illness and disabilities is another deplorable political choice. It unnecessarily risks pushing more people into poverty and hardship while the ballooning bank balances of the UK’s super-rich once again escape scot-free.
From Dame Clare Moriarty, chief executive of Citizens Advice
This government says it wants to boost living standards and tackle child poverty, but you can’t do that while slashing support for those who need it most. Yes, the benefits system needs fixing but these plans will just make life harder for those already struggling.
Our data is clear: disabled people already struggle with financial issues more than others. Many people getting disability benefits are also raising children so these cuts will send even more families to food banks.
We need a benefits system that helps people solve their problems, not create new ones.
Updated
In the Commons Liz Kendall has just finished taking questions. Judith Cummins, the deputy Speaker, said that around 100 MPs had asked a question.
Just before she finished, Kendall said she was keen to carry on engaging with MPs and that, if people had further questions, her door was open.
And these are from Stephen Evans, chief executive of the Learning and Work Institute, on Bluesky on the implications of the cuts.
1. Some early green paper thoughts: the cuts to Pip entitlement are as briefed in advance. Looks to me like new UC health claimants will be c£40pw worse off (health element dropping from £97 to £50, UC basic rise of £7), though more may now claim Pip too as it’ll be a single assessment.
2. Introduction of regular Work Support conversations & expansion of employment support is in line with @learnworkuk.bsky.social proposals. £1bn extra funding by 29-30 is big, though we’ll see in Spending Review whether other programmes end … learningandwork.org.uk/resources/re...
3. Looks like take up of employment support will be voluntary (which is good); puts emphasis on voluntary engagement. But fewer people will be in this group, as it’ll be linked to daily living element of Pip. Need to crunch data on who might not be eligible in future.
4. Right to try work, making sure people don’t have to restart claims or be reassessed, is unambiguously good news. Again, along lines we called for. learningandwork.org.uk/resources/re...
5. Not sure why under 22s shouldn’t be eligible for new UC health (which seems the proposal?). Argument is they should be on Youth Guarantee. But I suspect (as with previous govt change to HB entitlement) we’ll end up with a reasonable number of exemptions. So don’t make the change?
6. We have to wait for Spring Statement for equalities & poverty assessment, and likely numbers of extra people in work. We’ll do a bit of number crunching in mean time. There’s lots to welcome here, but ultimately paid for through cuts in Pip which will affect people.
Updated
This is from Faisal Islam, the BBC’s economics editor, on the impact of today’s cuts
Govt at this stage is providing no breakdown
But we know theres a £5bn fiscal saving being booked here …
That means hundreds of thousands of Pip receipients will be losing thousands of pounds ….
For example those not scoring 4 points or more on a single section of the daily living element will lose £3500 annual payment in November 2026.
Updated
Kendall faces repeated calls from Labour MPs for rethink over plans to cut disability benefits
In the Commons the Conservative benches are now more or less empty, but there are plenty of Labour MPs still keen to ask a question.
Most of the Labour backbenchers who have been speaking have raised concerns about the plans. Here are some of their comments.
From Debbie Abrahams, chair of the work and pensions committee
I would put that there are alternative, more compassionate ways to balance the books rather than on the back of sick and disabled people …
I implore my party to try and get our reforms to bed in first before we look to making the cuts. There’s so much evidence of the averse effects that the party opposite had with the cuts in support, and the restrictions in eligibility criteria when they were in government, including the deaths of vulnerable people, and we can’t have a repeat of that.
From Clive Efford
I’ve heard many people make a moral case for the changes that [Kendall] has announced today.
Does she agree that over the last 20 years those people with large amounts of wealth have done extremely well, whilst average household incomes have stagnated and the standard of living for the overwhelming majority has gone down? So while we make a moral case for changes to the benefits system, shouldn’t we also be making a case for how we tax wealth as opposed to income?
From Florence Eshalomi, chair of the housing committee
I agree with the secretary of state that many disabled and sick people want to work, but the reality is cutting Pip will not address the reasons why they don’t.
From John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor (elected as Labour, but currently independent because he lost the whip for voting against the government on an amendment to scrap the two-child benefit cap)
There are decisions made in this house that stay with you for the rest of your life. This is one of them …
The reality is trying to find up to £5bn worth of cuts by manipulating, by changing the Pip rules, the criteria will result in immense suffering and – we’ve seen it in the past – loss of life. So what monitoring – independent monitoring – will take place that will be reported to this House and what threshold of suffering will it take to take an alternative route to supporting disabled people?
From Dawn Butler, a former minister
How we go about [welfare reform], and the way we go about it, is fundamental and important, and I don’t think it should be linked to saving money, because that’s rather crass, and it’s caused lots of anxiety for my constituents in Brent East and elsewhere.
The patriotic millionaires have said that just a 2% on assets over £10m will bring in £22bn a year. That’s a better way to bring money in to help fill the blackhole that we found ourselves in.
Opposition parties say Labour cutting benefits is part of Tory-style austerity
Here is reaction to the announcement from more opposition parties.
From Steve Darling, the Liberal Democrat DWP spokesperson
If the government was serious about cutting welfare spending it would get serious about fixing health and social care and the broken Department for Work and Pensions.
That is why it has been so disappointing to see the government’s lack of urgency in this area, putting their social care review on a three-year timeline, kicking projects like new hospitals into the long grass, and still no overhaul of the Department.
From Stephen Flynn, the SNP’s leader at Westminster
The Labour party’s devastating cuts to disabled people are a total betrayal of the promises they made to voters at the election.
They will harm the most vulnerable, push disabled people into poverty, and mark the start of a new era of austerity cuts under the Labour party, which will hit the whole of society.
During the election, voters were promised there would be no return to austerity cuts but Keir Starmer has taken the axe to winter fuel payments, pushed children into poverty, blocked compensation for WASPI women – and now he is taking vital support away from the disabled.
From the Green party’s Siân Berry
I’ve heard nothing today that reassures me the government will stop scapegoating and stigmatising those in need, while impoverishing them to the tune of £5bn. Young and disabled people should have the support and backing of the government but instead they have been badly let down this month with the active trailing of terrifying plans.
It’s clear that these plans were plotted without the input of those whose lives will be most impacted. Disabled people must be listened to before any changes are made, and I hope that Labour backbenchers will join me in being their fiercest defenders and fight off the worst of these plans.
The chancellor must listen as well, to growing calls from Green MPs, the public and even many millionaires for a wealth tax. How can she stoop so low as any Conservative chancellor and take money away from disabled people rather than get a grip on the obscene wealth being hoarded in this country? This morally indefensible choice will have devastating consequences, and the government should be ready to answer for it.
From Ann Davies, Plaid Cymru’s DWP spokesperson
Stripping £5bn from the welfare bill will only add strain to already overstretched health services.
Once again, this UK Labour government is choosing short-term austerity over long-term solutions to the deep issues that affect us all …
Wales will particularly impacted, with the second-highest proportion of disabled people of working age in the UK. Devolved services will have to shoulder the costs of these damaging cuts, yet the Labour Welsh government remain silent. Plaid Cymru will stand up for the vulnerable.
Reform UK does not seem to have issued a public response to the announcement yet.
Updated
In the Commons Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader, says this announcement will cause “consternation and dismay” to people on disability benefits. Can Liz Kendall says no disabled people will be worse off? Or is the government taking £5bn from people who are already living the most difficult lives?
In response, Kendall says the statement is designed to stop people being written off. And, with 1,000 Pip claims being approved a day, “we can’t duck this challenge, because I want a security security system that is here there for centuries to come”.
This is what Corbyn posted about this on social media.
This is a seminal moment: a Labour government cutting disability benefits. Not just continuing Tory levels. Cutting.
This comes after a week of speculation, itself an act of cruelty by a government toying with people’s dignity.
These cuts are disgraceful - and will cost lives.
Disability charities urge government to abandon 'immoral and devastating' benefit cuts
Liz Kendall, who is still taking questions in the Commons, is arguing that sick and disabled people will be better off from these plans. She said that people able to work would be helped back into a job, making them better off, and that people never able to work would enjoy new protections.
But if there is anyone in the disability world who is taking that positive a view of what is being planned, they don’t seem to have spoken up yet. The initial reaction from disability charities is overwhelmingly damning.
Here are extracts from some of the statements that have already dropped.
From Charles Gillies, policy co-chair at the Disability Benefits Consortium, an umbrella body representing more than 100 charities and organisations
These immoral and devastating benefits cuts will push more disabled people into poverty, and worsen people’s health …
Any targeted cuts to disabled people on universal credit and employment and support allowance will largely hit those who are unable to work and rely on these benefits to survive.
We are united in urging the government to abandon these cruel cuts.
From James Taylor, executive director of strategy at Scope
The biggest cuts to disability benefits on record should shame the government to its core. They are choosing to penalise some of the poorest people in our society. Almost half of families in poverty include someone who is disabled.
Life costs more if you are disabled. Ripping £5bn out of the system by 2030 will be a catastrophe for disabled peoples’ living standards and independence.
From Sarah Hughes, chief executive at Mind
Mental health problems are not a choice – but it is a political choice to make it harder for people to access the support they need to live with dignity and independence.
These reforms will only serve to deepen the nation’s mental health crisis.
In the Commons the Labour MP Clive Lewis said these cuts would provide pain for millions of people. He asked Liz Kendall:
When she made the decision to go down this route, did they understand the pain and difficulty that this will cause millions of people, millions of our constituents who are using food banks, who are using social supermarkets, people who are on the brink.
This £5bn cut is going to impact them more than I think her department is giving credit for, and I would like her department to be able to look my constituents in the eye when I go back to them to tell them that this is going to work for them. Because as things stand, my constituents, my friends, my family are very angry about this and they do not think this is the kind of action that a Labour government takes.
Kendall replied:
I’ve spent years chairing Feeding Leicester, the programme to end hunger in my city and I know that I can look my constituents in the eye and say to them, I know that getting more people into better paid jobs is the key to their future success, I know dealing with their mental health problems which we know are so prevalent is so essential.
We, the Labour party, believe that if you can work, we will give you the help to get back on your feet, because that is the long-term route to tackling poverty, tackling inequality which is what this Labour party is all about.
Tory DWP spokesperson Helen Whately says £5bn cuts do not go far enough
Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, told the Commons that she thought the government should be going further.
In her response to Kendall, she said:
This is a now or never chance to seize the moment, a now or never for millions of people who will otherwise be signed off for what could end up being a lifetime on benefits, but this announcement today leaves me with more questions than answers.
How many people will this help back into work? By when? Surely we haven’t been waiting eight months just for another green paper? Where is the fit note reform, crucial to stem the flow of people onto benefits? Where is the action on people being signed off sick for the everyday ups and downs of life?
Why is she only planning to save £5bn when the bill is forecast to rise to over £100bn?
Fundamentally, this is too little, too late. The fact is £5bn just doesn’t cut it. With a bill so big, going up so fast, she needed to be tougher. She should be saying no more hard working taxpayers funding the family next door not to work. No more free top of the range cars for people who don’t need them.
Back in the Commons, Liz Kendall told MPs that impact assessments for her plans would be published alongside the spring statement.
Kendall says under-22s could be prevented from claiming health top-up for universal credit
Kendall ended her statement by saying the DWP would be spending an extra £1bn on employment support.
This would involve “tailored and personalised support to help people on a pathway to work, the largest ever investment in opportunities to work for sick and disabled people”, she said.
Kendall also said the government would consult on stopping people getting the health top-up for universal credit until they are 22. She said the savings would be “reinvested into work, support and training opportunities so every young person is earning or learning and on a pathway to success”.
Kendall confirms benefit changes to save more than £5bn by 2029-30
Kendall confirmed that the reforms she is announcing will save more than £5bn by 2029-30.
She said the Office for Budget Responsibility would publish its assessment of the savings next week, alongside the spring statement.
Kendall confirms Pip eligibility rules to be tightened, and assessment process to be reviewed
Turning to Pip, Kendall said the government had to make the system sustainable.
Social and demographic change means more people are now living with a disability, but the increase in disability benefits is double the rate of increasing prevalence of working-age disability in the country, with claims amongst young people up 150%, for mental health conditions up 190% and claims for learning difficulties up over 400%, according to the IFS.
Every day there are more than 1,000 new Pip awards. That’s the equivalent of adding a population the size of Leicester every single year.
That is not sustainable long term, above all, for the people who depend on this support, but the Tories have no proper plan to deal with this just yet more ill thought through consultations.
So today, I can announce this government will not bring in the Tory proposals for vouchers, because disabled people should have choice and control over their lives.
We will not means test Pip, because disabled people deserve extra support, whatever their incomes.
And I can confirm we will not freeze Pip either.
Instead, our reforms will focus support on those with the greatest needs. We will legislate for a change in Pip so people will need to score a minimum of four points in at least one activity to qualify for the daily living element of Pip from November 2026.
This will not affect the mobility component of Pip and only relates to the daily living element.
And alongside this, we will launch a review of the PIP assessment led [Stephen Timms] in close consultation with disabled people, the organisations that represent them, and other experts, so we make sure Pip and the assessment process is fit for purpose now and into the future.
Kendall says universal credit claimants with most severe disabilities will not face reassessment
Kendall said people on universal credit with the most severe disabilities would not face reassessment.
I can also announce for people on universal credit with the most severe disabilities and health conditions that will never improve, we want to ensure that they are never reassessed, to give them the confidence and dignity they deserve.
Kendall says reassessments for people on universal credit with health top-ups to be beefed up
Kendall says the government is also increase the reassessments for people getting universal credit with a health-top up.
We will also fix the failing system of reassessments. The Conservatives failed to switch reassessments back on after the pandemic, so they they’re down by more than two thirds, with face to face assessment going from seven in 10 to only one in 10.
We will turn these reassessments back on at scale and shift the focus back to doing more face to face.
And we will ensure that they are recorded as standard to give confidence to claimants and taxpayers that they’re being done properly.
Kendall says UC payments being rebalanced, with standard rate going up, and some health top-ups frozen or cut
Kendall says the current universal credit system creates “perverse financial incentives”, because people out of work who say they are too sick to work get paid a lot more than other people out of work. She says:
The Tories ran down the value of the universal credit standard allowance. As a result, the health top-up is now worth double the standard allowance at more than £400 a month, and in 2017 they took away extra financial help for the group of people who could prepare for work.
So we’re left with a binary assessment of can or can’t work, and a clear financial incentive to define yourself as incapable of work, something the OBR, IFS and others say is a likely factor driving people on to incapacity benefits.
Today, we tackle this problem head on. We will legislate to rebalance the payments in universal credit from April next year, holding the value of the health top-up fixed in cash terms for existing claimants, and reducing it for new claimants, with an additional premium for people with severe lifelong conditions that mean that they will never work to give them the financial security they deserve.
And alongside this we will bring in a permanent above-inflation rise to the standard allowance in universal credit for the first time ever, a £775 annual increase in cash terms by 2029-30 and a decisive step to tackle the perverse incentives in the system.
Updated
Kendall says 'right to try' will let people on sickness benefits try work without immediately having benefits cut
Kendall confirms the government will legislate for a “right to try” – meaning that people claiming sickness benefits can try out a new job, without immediately having their benefits cut.
We will do more by legislating for a right to try, guaranteeing that work, in and of itself, will never lead to a benefit reassessment, giving people the confidence to take the plunge and try work without the fear this will put their benefits at risk.
Updated
Kendall says WCA being scrapped, with Pip assessment process being used instead
Kendall says the government is scrapping the Tory proposals to reform the work capability assessment (WCA). She points out that the proposal was found unlawful by the courts.
She goes on:
Instead, we will scrap the WCA in 2028.
In future, extra financial support for health conditions in universal credit will be available solely through the Pip (personal independence payment] assessment.
So extra income is based on the impact of someone’s health condition or disability, not on their capacity to work, reducing the number of assessments that people have to go through and a vital step towards de-risking work.
Kendall says government to consult on merging JSA and ESA benefits
Kendall says the first priority is prevention.
Almost 4 million people are in work with a work limiting health condition, and around 300,000 fall out of work every year.
So we’ve got to do far more to help people stay in work and get back to work quickly, because your chances of returning are five times higher in the first year.
She says the government wants to help more employers offer support for disabled workers, including through reasonable adjustments.
And she says the government is going to consult on a new benefit.
Our green paper will consult on a major reform of contributory benefits, merging contributions-based job seeker’s allowance and employment support allowance into a new time-limited unemployment insurance, paid at a higher rate, without having to prove you cannot work in order to get it. So if you have paid into the system, you’ll get stronger income protection while we help you get back on track.
Kendall says there will always be people who can never work.
The social security system will always be there for people “in genuine need”, she says.
That is a principle the government will not compromise on.
But disabled people and people with health conditions who can work should have the same right choices and chances to work as everybody else.
Liz Kendall tells MPs benefits system 'holding our country back'
Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, is speaking now.
She says the government is ambitious for people.
But social security system we inherited from the Conservatives is failing the very people it is supposed to help and holding our country back.
She give figures to back this up.
The facts speak for themselves. One in 10 people of working age now claiming a sickness or disability benefit, almost 1 million young people, not in education, employment or training. That is one in eight of all our young people.
2.8 million out of work due to long term sickness and the number of people claiming personal independence payments set to double this decade from two to 4.3 million.
With the growth in claims rising faster among young people, and mental health conditions, and with claims up to four times higher in parts of the Midlands, Wales and the north where economic demand is weakest, places that were decimated in the 80s and 90s.
She says other countries do not have the same problem with inactivity in the workplace.
Where support is available for people with mental health and benefit concerns
We may have a lot of readers today with mental health and benefit concerns who may be worried or alarmed at what is happening. If you are in this category, and you would like help, here are some organisations you can contact.
Mental health support
• Mind runs a support line on 0300 102 1234 as a safe and confidential place to talk openly. It also has an information line, on 0300 123 3393, for details of where to get help near you. And its welfare benefits line – 0300 222 5782 – supports anyone with mental health problems who is navigating the benefits system.
• Samaritans is there to talk to you for free 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Call them on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org.
• The disability charity Scope has a forum where you can chat in a supportive atmosphere to people going through the same experiences.
• NHS England has an online mental health triage service.
Benefits support
• The Trussell Trust's Help through Hardship helpline, on 0808 208 2138, is a free and confidential phone service offered alongside Citizens Advice that provides advice to people experiencing hardship. You can also find your local Trussell Trust food bank here.
• Benefits and Work provides guides, forums and newsletters to help people navigate the benefits system and get the support they are entitled to. This includes benefit applications and appeals.
• Turn2Us provides a free benefits calculator to help you find out what benefits you can claim, as well as a grants search service and a Pip Helper to assist you in applying for the benefit.
• The Law Centres website helps people find their local service for benefits support and more, while Advicelocal provides a search directory tool to find your local advice provider.
Updated
Key event
Updated
Pip caseload up 12% over past year, DWP says
Today the DWP has issued figures about Pip. (See 12.27pm.) PA Media says:
A total of 3.66 million claimants in England and Wales were entitled to personal independence payments (Pip) as of January 31 2025, according to new figures published by the Department for Work & Pensions.
This is up 12% from 3.27 million a year earlier in January 2024.
At the end of January 2020, before the start of the Covid pandemic, the figure stood at 2.14 million.
It then rose to 2.36 million by the end of January 2021, 2.57 million by January 2022 and and 2.93 million by January 2023.
The current total of 3.66 million is 71% higher than the equivalent figure five years ago.
Liz Kendall will be making her statement to MPs about sickness and disability benefits at 12.30pm. She is expected to focus on two benefits in particular.
Pip (personal independent payments): This is a benefit that helps people cover extra cost they incur because they are disabled. It replaced the disability living allowance, and it is claimed both by people who are working and who are out of work. It is not means tested. There is a daily living component, and a mobility component, and the exact amount people receive depends on how they score in these two categories. It can be worth more than £600 per month.
Universal credit sickness payments: universal credit is a general benenfit, but it now incorporates what used to be incapacity benefit – the extra payment to people who are out of work because they are sick or disabled. This can be worth up to £416.19 per month, paid in addition to the standard rate of UC, £393.45 a month.
Updated
No 10 says David Lammy was wrong to tell MPs government thinks Israel has broken international law in Gaza
Yesterday, in the House of Commons, David Lammy, the foreign secretary, said that Israel was in breach of international law because of the way it has been withholding aid from Gaza. In response to a direct question from Labour’s Rupa Huq, he replied:
My honourable friend is right. This is a breach of international law. Israel, quite rightly, must defend its own security, but we find the lack of aid - and it has now been 15 days since aid got into Gaza – unacceptable, hugely alarming and very worrying. We urge Israel to get back to the number of trucks we were seeing going in – way beyond 600 – so that Palestinians can get the necessary humanitarian support they need at this time.
But this morning Downing Street failed to back Lammy, and said instead that the government’s position is Israel is “at clear risk” of breaching international law. At the lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson said:
Our position remains that Israel’s actions in Gaza are at clear risk of breaching international humanitarian law, and we continue to call on the government of Israel to abide by its international obligations when it comes to humanitarian assistance.
The spokesperson at first said that Lammy yesterday used this formula. When it was put to him that Lammy told MPs Israel had breached international law, not that it was at risk of doing so, the spokesperson said “there hasn’t been a change in policy here”. He claimed Lammy’s position was that Israel was at risk of breaching humanitarian law.
Asked if Lammy went further than he should have done, the spokesperson said that was a matter for the Foreign Office.
Asked if Lammy would be making a correction, the spokesperson again said that was a matter of the Foreign Office.
Farage accuses Badenoch of 'hypocrisy' over net zero, saying she could have opposed plans in 2019
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, has accused Kemi Badenoch of performing an U-turn on net zero. In a statement issued this morning, under the headline ‘Farage responds to Kemi’s net zero hypocrisy’, he said:
Kemi is fooling no-one. Let’s not forget that she happily waved through Conservative government legislation on this, including enshrining net zero by 2050 into law.
If she truly believed this would bankrupt the country, why didn’t she voice her opposition sooner?
This is a desperate policy from a leader and party floundering in the polls in an attempt to hitch themselves onto Reform’s momentum. We have been consistent from the start: scrap net zero and save our country from economic catastrophe. Only Reform will cut your energy bills.
During the Q&A, Badenoch denied changing her mind on net zero. (See 11.01am.) Here is her answer on this in full.
I haven’t changed my mind. What you’re describing is called collective responsibility.
I was a member of the government. I sat in the committees where people were trying to make the plans work, and I could see that they were not going to deliver. I said so in 2019 when I asked the question, when it was first announced.
I said it again in 2022 when I first ran for leadership. I said it in 2023 when I lobbied to reduce the ZEV mandates that was being imposed on the car manufacturers who were coming to my office telling me it couldn’t work. And I said it again last year.
When talking about the 2019 “question”, Badenoch was referring to the fact that she was one of the MPs present when the Commons debated the Climate Change Act 2008 (2050 Target Amendment) Order 2019 that set 2050 as the net zero target. She also mentioned this in her speech (see 10.47am), saying she was one of only two MPs who expressed caution.
Here is the Hansard transcript of that debate in June 2019. And here is Badenoch’s (very short) intervention.
Many of my constituents, especially schoolchildren, will be delighted by this announcement, but others are rightly sceptical about the costs. What steps will the minister take to ensure that the plan will be achievable and affordable?
The order was approved without a vote.
At the time of this debate, Badenoch was not a minister, and so she was not really bound by “collective responsibility”, a term that normally just applies to members of the government. Technically, she could have tried to force a division in that debate in June 2019. But given the strong cross-party support for the measure, and the fact that few, if any, other MPs were actively opposed to the law at the time, it would have been an eccentric move, especially for a backbencher with ambitions.
Badenoch says she won't commit to leaving ECHR without plan to make it work, because that was flaw with Brexit
Q: What is your thinking on leaving the European convention on human rights (ECHR)?
Badenoch says what she said during the leadership campaign still holds. She is not ruling it out, but if the party is going to commit to this, it needs a plan.
I remember voting before I became an MP on the 2016 Brexit referendum, only to become an MP the next year and see that we’ve made a decision, but a lot of the thinking had not been done, and we were making it up on the fly. We cannot do that again.
Even leaving the ECHR is not enough to solve the myriad problems that we have. That’s why I talked about lawfare in its entirety.
Updated
Q: Will you set a new target for net zero?
Badenoch says she is not going to make a target now. That would be making the same mistake.
If all the experts say there should be a date, she will set one.
But she wants to include people like businesses and sceptics in the decision making process.
Q: What do you to cut emissions yourself?
Badenoch says she does everything possible. She does not buy many clothes for her children, she says. She says recycling is cheaper.
Badenoch does not commit to Tories maintaining support for triple lock at next election
Q: Will you maintain the pension triple lock?
Badenoch says at the moment the party is committed to the triple lock.
When we are changing policy, I will stand on a stage like this, and I will announce that we’re changing policy. Until then, the policy stays.
That sounded like Badenoch keeping the door very open to the possibility of changing this policy before the election.
Q: Should MPs get a vote before the UK deploys troops on the ground?
Badenoch says there should be consensus. That would be a very significant decision, she says.
Updated
Q: Aren’t you just trying to trump Reform UK with this policy?
Badenoch says there was no Reform UK in 2019 when she started talking about this.
Q: Labour says it can reduce energy bills by £300. Can you do that?
Badenoch says she wants to start from objectives that are not abstract. Net zero by 2050 is an abstract objective, she says.
She says:
We need to start with, how we making people’s lives better? Is this going to keep businesses going? How do we make those cheaper?
The Tories need to make policies based on how they will impact on ordinary people, she says.
Badenoch denies changing her mind about net zero target
Q: Why have you changed your mind on this?
Badenoch says she has not changed her mind. As a member of the government, she abided by collective responsibility. She says in government she regularly questioned the case for net zero.
The person who’s been consistent in all this is me.
Q: What do you say to your critics who argue that the party made a mistake picking you as leader?
Badenoch says:
I’m not going to pretend that I won’t have critics … This is politics. Being a politician is about being criticised.
What I’m asking people to do is listen to what I’m saying. I am not doing what all the other parties are doing. We are changing the way we do things.
The Conservative Party is under new leadership, and we have to make sure that we think things through and don’t just give announcements without the proper plan to back them.
Badenoch is now taking questions.
Q: You don’t wnat to get to net zero by 2050, but what is your date? What do you say to people who argue that, without a date, you don’t have a plan?
Badenoch replies:
That’s not how it works. You can’t just pull [a date] out of the air. And what we did was pick a target and then start thinking of how to get there.
We need to start thinking about it in a different way. How does this impact families? How is business going to help us deliver? And that’s what the policy commissions are going to do.
Badenoch says Claire Coutinho, the shadow energy secretary, will review policy in this areas.
Labour may not be interested in these questions, but we are, we are interested because as Conservatives, we want to protect our environment, we want to secure our energy and deliver a better world for our children.
Someone has to save these noble objectives from the zealots who have hijacked this agenda.
She says this wlll be the start of what she describes as “the UK’s biggest policy renewal programme in 50 years”.
Badenoch explains three reasons why she's 'net zero sceptic'
Badenoch says reaching net zero by 2050 is impossible.
Net zero by 2050 is impossible.
I don’t say that with pleasure.
Or because I have some ideological desire to dismantle it – in fact, we must do what we can to improve our natural world.
I say it because to anyone who has done any serious analysis knows it can’t be achieved without a serious drop in our living standards or by bankrupting us.
Badenoch says she has three truths about net zero.
First, the published plans are completely muddled.
It is true that the UK has made the greatest progress on carbon emissions in the developed world, yet we are only responsible for 1% of global emissions. Even if we hit absolute zero, we will not have net zero around the world …
Second, even where there is a plan we are behind.
Let’s look at one easy example. By 2040 the Committee on Climate Change says more than half of UK homes need to rip out their boilers and replace them with a heat pump. There is no way we can do this quickly enough.
On that time scale, 17m houses need to be fitted with an expensive heat pump in just 15 years. How many houses have one now? Fewer than 300,000 because heat pumps one only lots of expensive electricity, and it turns out many people just don’t like them …
Third … we are massively exposing ourselves to countries who do not share our values.
Take solar panels. The good news is that costs have dropped in the last decade. The less good news? 10 years ago, we were heavily dependent on China for all of the key components. Today, we’re even more dependent.
Look at the top dozen makers of solar panels. They are nearly all Chinese. That’s an extraordinary dependency, given what we learned during Covid about over reliance on these supply chains …
Those three truths are why I call myself a net zero sceptic.
Badenoch claims parliament legislated for net zero without plan for how to achieve it
Badenoch is now speaking about net zero.
Let’s start by telling the truth on energy and net zero.
Every single thing we do in our daily lives is dependent on cheap, abundant energy. When energy became cheap and abundant, living standards began to rise, health and life expectancy grew.
Cheap, abundant energy is the foundation of civilization as we know it today. We mess with it at our peril.
But that’s exactly what’s been happening for 20 years, and it’s now starting to cause real pain for everyday people and businesses.
But energy costs are now too high, she says.
She says government policy is trying to do two things – bring energy costs down, while protecting the environment.
She says when the Commons legislated for net zero in 2019, it did so after a 90-minute debate without a vote. She goes on:
Of the 22 MPs who spoke that day, only two sounded notes of caution. I was one of them.
I asked for the plan. I asked for it that day. I asked for it many days after and I waited and waited and waited. 840 days later, a plan came, and it wasn’t enough, so much so that environmental bodies are taking the government to court and winning, because there isn’t enough detail.
We are closing down oil fields in Scotland that we need from transition from gas to renewables, because the plan doesn’t make sense.
Let’s think about it for a minute. We are already a sixth of the way through net zero, 2050, that we planned that day, and we are still arguing about what the plan is to get there.
And all the politicians who gloss over the lack of a plan will be long gone when those targets are missed in the future and our children suffer.
Badenoch says that, when Nick Clegg was deputy PM, he dismissed the idea of building more nuclear power stations because they would not be ready until 2022. “That decision has cost us billions,” she says.
And she says Ed Davey, the current Lib Dem leader, was energy secretary at the time.
Updated
Badenoch says Britain 'stagnating or going backwards', and people wrong to assume prosperity always guaranteed
Kemi Badenoch is speaking now.
She starts by saying that we are living off the inheritance of our ancestors.
That led to an assumption that prosperity was guaranteed, she says.
We are a wealthy country, but we are becoming weaker through complacency. We are losing our resilience. We can’t make things like we used to. We don’t build as quickly. We are spending too much on debt, too much on welfare and too little on defence. We are not growing like we should be …
if you look at real disposable income or GDP per capita or home ownership, you will see that things are stagnating or going backwards. In 1974 you could save up for a deposit to buy a house in less than six months. Now, the average time is more than 11 years.
She is also showing graphs to her audience, including ones showing other countries growing more quickly.
Environmentalists say it's wrong and self-defeating for Badenoch to say net zero can't be reached by 2050
Kemi Badenoch will be giving her speech shortly. She is launching the Conservative party’s policy renewal programme, but she has made splash headlines (at least in the Mail and in the Telegraph) by briefing overnight that she will say reaching net zero by 2050 is impossible.
Environmentalists have strongly criticised the move.
This is from Mel Evans, head of climate at Greenpeace UK.
The past few years have taught us the surest route to falling living standards is staying hooked on volatile, expensive and polluting fossil fuels. Throwing in the towel on our climate goals means giving up on making life better for British people now and in the future. With green industries growing three times faster than the rest of the UK economy, it also means giving up on the economic opportunity of the century.
This is from Sam Hall, director of the Conservative Environment Network.
It is a mistake for Kemi Badenoch to have jumped the gun on her own policy review and decided net zero isn’t possible by 2050. This undermines the significant environmental legacy of successive Conservative governments who provided the outline of a credible plan for tackling climate change. The important question now is how to build out this plan in a way that supports growth, strengthens security, and follows conservative, free market principles …
The net zero target is driven not by optimism but by scientific reality; without it climate change impacts and costs will continue to worsen. Abandon the science and voters will start to doubt the Conservative Party’s seriousness on the clean energy transition, damaging both growth and the fight against climate change.
This is from Alasdair Johnstone from Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit, a research organisation on climate issues.
Given that we need to reach net zero emissions to stop greenhouse gases increasing and so the ever worsening floods and heatwaves driven by climate change, any sense of giving up on the goal 25 years before the finish line, particularly when the UK has made good progress, seems premature.
It is certainly technologically and economically feasible for the UK to hit net zero emissions and the clear majority of the British public back the net zero emissions target seeing renewables and clean technology as the top growth sector. The UK’s net zero economy grew by 10% in 2024, and momentum towards renewables and electrification globally is only going in one direction, so any signal of a slowdown is a recipe for investor uncertainty and economic jeopardy.It was a Conservative government that provided global leadership in setting a net zero emissions target since which more than three-quarters of global GDP is now covered by a net zero commitment.
And this is from Shaun Spiers, executive director of the Green Alliance, a green thinktank.
As the public continue to experience the catastrophic impacts of an economic crisis driven largely by the price of gas, it is disappointing to see Kemi Badenoch turn her back on cleaner, cheaper, homegrown energy. And given the proud record of the Conservative party on the environmental agenda, it is even more disappointing to see the leader of the opposition take cues from climate deniers across the pond.
McFadden says Labour has 'duty' to reform welfare system because it was elected 'on platform of change'
In his interview on the Today programme, Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister, suggested Labour MPs had a duty to support the changes to sickness and disability benefits being announced.
Asked what he would say to backbenchers minded to vote against the plans, he replied:
Look, I’m not going to deny that in the history of the Labour party, these issues about welfare and support have sometimes been difficult.
But when you get elected on a platform of change, and when you tell the public, the electorate, that you believe you have inherited a situation which needs change, then my message to any colleague in that position is, we have a duty to make those changes. It was the word on our manifesto.
And part of the change that we need is a welfare state that is better suited to the 21st century, that is sustainable for the future, that is there for people who need it, and that puts work at the heart of it.
And that is fully in line with the values of the Labour party.
McFadden suggests people with most severe disabilities won't have to get their Pip reassessed
Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister, hinted that one change being announced today will spare people with the most severe disabilities from having their Pip (personal independence payment – a disability benefit) reassessed.
In a report for the Times, Chris Smyth says the current reassessment process (when Pip entitlement gets reviewed, to see if it should continue), will change. He reports:
It is understood that those with conditions that have no prospect of improving will be guaranteed PIPs and told they need never be reassessed. Rather than a list of conditions, this will be applied case by case to disabilities that are either permanent or get worse.
For those with other conditions, however, [Liz] Kendall is expected to signal more frequent reassessments. At present claimants are given awards of up to ten years, but there are no clear rules about when they will be reassessed, and ministers want to see a significant increase. It remains unclear whether more reviews will be face to face. A switch to remote assessments since Covid has been suggested as a reason for more people having payments maintained rather than reduced.
Kendall hinted that she favoured this approach in the Commons yesterday.
Asked if the most severely people should be assessed again and again, McFadden told BBC Breakfast:
I don’t want to pre-empt what the announcement will be but I think for people in circumstances where it’s clear they can never work and are not going to get better, and in fact it might be a degenerative condition that gets progressively worse, then people should look out for how that’s treated in today’s announcement, because I think those kind of conditions will feature today.
And obviously you’re not going to treat somebody in those circumstances the same way as someone whose condition might be temporary and with a bit of support they could go into work.
Pat McFadden defends disability benefit cuts, saying you can’t ‘tax and borrow your way out of need to reform state’
Good morning. Nothing is permanent in politics. This year will be the 10th anniversary of Jeremy Corbyn’s election as Labour leader, in a contest where Liz Kendall, seen as the rightwing, Blairite candidate, came last, on a humiliating 4.5% of the vote. A decade on, Morgan McSweeney, who managed her campaign, is now more or less running the country as the PM’s chief of staff, Kendall herself is work and pensions secretary and she is about to announce cuts to disability benefits that may horrify many of the 59.5% who voted for Corbyn in 2015 (some of whom will no longer be party members).
Here is our overnight preview story, by Pippa Crerar, Heather Stewart and Jessica Elgot.
Yesterday Diane Abbott, the Labour leftwinger, was saying the government should introduce a wealth tax instead and this morning Sharon Graham, the Unite general secretary, is making a similar argument in an article for the Daily Mirror. She says:
That is not the sort of society that we want to live in. I can’t understand why we’re making these types of decisions, whether it’s winter fuel cuts or looking at taking Pip away from people with disabilities.
Why are we making those decisions prior to us looking at things like a wealth tax, prior to us looking at things like a profits tax? The richest 50 families in Britain are worth £500bn. That’s the same as half the wealth of Britain. That’s the same as 33 million people in Britain.
It is not just the Corbynites who are thinking like this. Last week, in an interview with Matt Forde’s Political Party podcast (here, at 57:30m in), while not quite advocating a wealth tax, Alastair Campbell did describe it as a reasonable policy “hard choice” rather than a wild leftwing fantasy – which is probably how he would have responded to the proposition in his No 10 days.
This morning Pat McFadden, the Cabinet Office minister, has been giving interviews. Echoing the line used by Downing Street yesterday, he said the changes being announced today weren’t just about saving money, but were intended to fix a broken system that can leave sick people trapped on benefits when they would be better off returning to work. Asked why the government wasn’t just taxing the rich more, he replied:
Well, there are always going to be people who say [find the money] elsewhere.
We have a progressive tax system. The top 1% pay about a third of tax.
I don’t think you can, in the end, tax and borrow your way out of the need to reform the state.
The prime minister spoke about reform of the state in a major speech last week. We are reforming the state in more ways than one, and part of an essential reform of the state is to make sure that the welfare state that we believe in as a party is fit for the 21st century.
And we cannot sit back and relax as millions, literally millions, of people go on to these benefits with little or no hope of work in the future.
(McFadden’s figure about the top 1% paying a third of tax is true of the share of income tax they pay, but not the figure for their share of the entire tax burden.)
In interviews, McFadden also insisted that the cabinet fully supports the Kendall plans. “Yes, I believe the cabinet is united behind taking on the issue of the growing benefits bill,” he told Times Radio.
Today will be dominated by the publication of the sickness and disability benefits green paper, but we are getting a speech from Kemi Badenoch first. It is another example of how nothing is permanent in politics. Six years ago the Conservative government passed legislation making reducing carbon emissions to net zero by 2050 a legally binding aim. There was a strong, cross-party consensus in favour of the target. Today Badenoch is dismantling that, with a speech saying “net zero by 2050 is impossible”.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.
10.30am: Kemi Badenoch gives a speech launching the Conservative party’s policy renewal programme.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
11.30am: Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
Morning: David Lammy, the foreign secretary, meets Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign affairs chief, in London.
After 12.30pm: Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, makes a statement to MPs about the green paper on changes to sickness and disability benefits.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
