By Megan Kenyon
The chaos over the government鈥檚 proposed welfare reforms continues. On Monday, the government made a last-ditch attempt to stave off a rebellion against the welfare bill; it did not go to plan. In fact, it might have made things worse. A reasoned amendment laid by the chair of the Treasury Select Committee, Meg Hillier, and backed by more than 120 MPs, threatened to scrap the government鈥檚 plans. Ministers spent the best part of the weekend locked in negotiations with rebel Labour MPs, talking them down from their opposition to Liz Kendall鈥檚 controversial bill, and working out what concessions could be offered to win over backbenchers.
In the end, the government U-turned, conceding that a stricter eligibility criteria for Personal Independence Payments (Pip) will only apply to those claiming after November 2026, rather than existing claimants. The offer to MPs also included a review of the assessment process, to be completed by the Social Security Minister, Stephen Timms. In all, these concessions will halve the savings set to be made from this bill; the government initially estimated it would save around 拢5bn by 2030 from the reforms. These concessions will cost them 拢2.5bn over the next five years.
At first, all seemed (almost) well. Some opponents remained, claiming that introducing these cuts at the end of next year will create a two-tiered system. One particularly disgruntled MP told me they expected the government to spend most of the run up to the bill 鈥渢urd polishing鈥 the concessions. 鈥淚t鈥檚 incomprehensible that they think we could still be bought off,鈥 they said. Another rebel told me: 鈥淚f I could vote against it twice, I would. Nothing has changed for me. This is fundamentally against everything the Labour Party should do in government.鈥
Hillier and other Labour select committee chairs (who had previously backed her amendment) appeared to come around. But when Kendall stepped up to the dispatch box to formally announce the concessions, things began to unravel. The Work and Pensions Secretary told the Commons that the Timms review 鈥 which she confirmed would be implemented 鈥渁s soon as possible following its completion鈥 鈥 is not set to report until autumn 2026. This means any changes to the assessment process could be implemented after changes to the eligibility criteria have been put in place.
Labour MPs were quick to jump on this timeline. Almost every Labour speaker (including Hillier) during the debate asked Kendall the same question: why implement eligibility changes before seeing the Timms review? Even prior to Kendall鈥檚 speech, Debbie Abrahams, the chair of the Work and Pensions Select Committee, one of the rebellion鈥檚 key architects, said she cannot vote for the plans (Abrahams said she will either vote against or abstain). Vicky Foxcroft, the government whip who resigned over the bill, has also said she will not vote for the bill in its current form, even with these new concessions.
In the hours following Kendall鈥檚 Commons appearance, another reasoned amendment to scrap the bill was laid by the Labour MP Rachael Maskell backed by 138 disability organisations. As of this morning, it has received the backing of 67 MPs, 35 of whom are Labour backbenchers (83 signatories would be required to make this likely to defeat the government).
This is bad news for the government. After days of negotiations, and 拢2.5bn worth of concessions, there is still a chance they could be headed for defeat. (Though one Labour MP told me last night, it is 鈥渟till too close to call鈥.) Senior government ministers are furious with the rebels. Their view is that there are all sorts of tiered consequences after changes in the law, and that the rebels have hammered the legitimacy of the government at a time when it is behind Reform UK in the polls.
Government figures were back out on the offensive last night, once again attempting to talk rebels down. After the consequences that were brought against those who voted to cut the two child benefit cap in July last year (seven Labour rebels lost the whip, three of whom have yet to be reinstated), it is not hard to speculate that the government could come down hard on the rebels whether that be removing the whip or barring them from future governmental positions. One rebel MP told me last night that considering there is such heavy pressure, they thought that numbers were likely going down. The order paper this morning confirmed that Meg Hillier had withdrawn her reasoned amendment.
Kendall will begin proceedings at 12.40PM, after which there will be a debate which is likely to get fiery. MPs will vote this evening, so the government will have to hold its breath until then. But even if this bill does go through, it鈥檚 unlikely that the government鈥檚 worries will be quelled. That such a chaotic and terse set of events has unfolded over the past week is not characteristic of a government still less than a year into its first term in office. If Starmer wants to avoid more disarray, the government will have to get a grip of its messaging 鈥 both with the public, and the PLP.
This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here