Labour lawmakers who are opposed to the government’s proposed £5bn in cuts to disability benefits have stated they refuse to support legislation implementing these cuts. This stance remains firm even if the government offers additional funding to reduce child poverty in an attempt to sway their votes. Legislation to enact the cuts, including a tighter eligibility criteria for the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) system, is scheduled to be introduced in the House of Commons early June.
These stringent eligibility changes will make it more difficult for individuals with certain disabilities to receive PIP by requiring those who are unable to perform certain daily tasks, like washing their lower body, to also have another limiting condition to qualify. Despite urgent efforts by the Labour party whip and ministers to persuade MPs, a significant rebellion appears to be materializing.
In an attempt to sway the rebellious Labour MPs, there has been a suggestion to publish the government’s long-awaited strategy on child poverty and offer additional funds for poor families with children under five. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is reportedly considering a proposal aimed at the youngest children that would carry a smaller price tag than abolishing the controversial two-child limit on benefit payments.
Rachael Maskell, Labour MP for York Central, has publicly stated her opposition to these cuts. Maskell decries any attempt to vote on legislation to curb benefits for both impoverished children and the disabled as an unjustifiable trade-off. She urges the government to heed the collective opposition to these measures, emphasized by widespread civil society opposition and public dissent.
stretle reverberations of this dispute have been evident as both government and Labour MPs hold talks with concerned members, only to find a strong and unyielding opposition among those ranks. A contingent of lawmakers is reportedly preparing to advocate for a complete overhaul of the plans. Government sources express a deepening concern, explicitly stating that the issue is becoming a non-negotiable point for a significant number of Labour members.
Further, Labour MPs have expressed their frustration at the lack of comprehensive impact assessment from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) before being asked to vote on the legislation. The OBR’s report on the potential effectiveness of these cuts in transitioning individuals from welfare to the job market is not due until the autumn.
Keir Starmer, Labour’s leader, previously argued for a “moral” stance on reforming the benefits system, asserting it is both economically and socially imperative. He emphasized Labour’s commitment to protecting those in need and supporting those able to work back into employment. However, not all Labour MPs share this sentiment.
Neil Duncan-Jordan, a Labour MP for Poole who narrowly won his seat with just 18 votes, is strongly against the cuts. Duncan-Jordan, who represents over 5,000 PIP recipients in his area, argues that there is no hierarchy of need and that these benefit cuts would cost him his seat. Duncan-Jordan sees it as illogical to vote on the cuts without the OBR’s assessment on their impact on employment and emphasizes that such a vote is blind faith without this critical information.
The OBR’s report following Rachel Reeves’s spring statement pointed out the uncertainty of the impacts of these policies and past failed welfare reforms. The Office plans to do a thorough evaluation of the proposed policies’ impact on the labor market as part of their upcoming forecast.
Source: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/apr/20/the-whole-policy-is-wrong-rebellion-among-labour-mps-grows-over-5bn-benefits-cut
