← Back to House of Commons Debates
Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill 2025-07-01
01 July 2025
Lead MP
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
Taxation
Other Contributors: 89
At a Glance
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions raised concerns about universal credit and personal independence payment bill 2025-07-01 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
Today, I am moving to read the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill a Second time. This bill seeks to fix the broken benefits system that we inherited from the Conservatives and deliver better lives for millions of people across our country. Our plans are rooted in principles such as compassion, equality, social justice, and responsibility for the welfare state's sustainability. The current system incentivises people to define themselves as incapable of work just to afford living, writes them off without help or support, and blames them to grab headlines, resulting in 2.8 million people out of work due to long-term sickness and one in eight young people not in education, employment, or training. This Bill will help those who can work do so, protect those who cannot, and begin to get the benefits bill on a more sustainable footing by quadrupling investment in employment support for sick and disabled people from £250 million to £1 billion a year. Additionally, it includes an above-inflation rise to the universal credit standard allowance, protecting incomes of those with severe conditions and ensuring that individuals will never be reassessed based on their health conditions.
Luke Evans
Con
Hinckley and Bosworth
Question
Will the Minister give way?
Minister reply
Let me make some progress.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Question
Will the Minister give way?
Minister reply
Let me make some progress.
Paul Holmes
Con
Hamble Valley
Question
Why do her Government’s figures show that actions will put an extra 150,000 people into poverty?
Minister reply
This is chutzpah as Conservative Members put an extra 900,000 children into poverty. This Government are determined to tackle child poverty and will take 100,000 children out of poverty through plans to extend free school meals.
Polly Billington
Lab
East Thanet
Question
Will she publish further assessments that provide a more accurate view?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right, and we will indeed publish further updated impact assessments before Committee stage.
Question
Can the Secretary of State commit to add an explicit reference to the Bill to ensure that those with fluctuating conditions such as Parkinson’s and MS are not locked out?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman raises a very important point. We will protect people whose condition progresses, meeting severe conditions criteria.
Clive Betts
Lab
Sheffield South East
Question
Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Minister reply
I will make a tiny bit of progress, and then I will give way.
Question
The £300 million investment is built off the back of WorkWell pilots; are they planning to continue them?
Minister reply
Joining up work and health support is essential. We are building on that with additional investment, quadrupling what we inherited from the Conservative party.
Toby Perkins
Lab
Chesterfield
Question
Can the Secretary of State say more about how the review will rebuild confidence among disabled groups who have been impacted by every welfare reform?
Minister reply
The review is crucial in addressing concerns raised by disabled people and their organisations. It will involve co-production with these stakeholders, ensuring that their voices are central to developing this policy.
Calder Valley
Question
Will the review guarantee that disabled people and their organisations are key voices in shaping future policies impacting them?
Minister reply
The process will involve discussions with disabled people, their organisations, and other experts to ensure they are central to shaping this policy.
Esther McVey
Con
Tatton
Question
Has the Government sought legal advice on whether it is lawful to treat individuals with similar conditions differently within the benefits system?
Minister reply
The Opposition party had different rules and rates for people on existing benefits compared to those on new benefits, which raises questions about consistency.
Edward Leigh
Con
Gainsborough
Question
Given the disruption caused by covid, can we all agree that in-person assessments should be prioritised and resumed quickly?
Minister reply
The Government agrees with the need to resume in-person assessments as soon as possible.
Laurence Turner
Lab
Birmingham Northfield
Question
The right hon. Member is incorrect about the historical performance of governments during recessions regarding unemployment levels, particularly with regard to the first Labour Government and Ted Heath's government.
Minister reply
The opposition is mistaken in its statistical claims. The figures presented by the opposition do not reflect the reality of unemployment trends under various administrations.
Graham Stuart
Con
Beverley and Holderness
Question
Is it true that the Chancellor bears significant responsibility for this welfare fiasco, given her lack of foresight?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend is correct; the Chancellor's mistakes are at the heart of this issue. The reforms were rushed due to a worsening economic outlook and flawed planning.
Mark Ferguson
Lab
Gateshead Central and Whickham
Question
How does the Secretary of State reconcile her support for these welfare changes with the Leader of the Opposition's position on fiscal responsibility?
Minister reply
The hon. Gentleman is mistaken if he believes we are not clear about our goals. We want to see a reduction in welfare spending, increased employment rates, and adherence to existing fiscal commitments.
Chris Vince
Lab/Co-op
Harlow
Question
Will the Secretary of State provide clarity on her position regarding these reforms?
Minister reply
Despite flaws in the Bill, we have offered conditional support for changes that benefit the national interest. The Government's response has been inadequate and rushed.
Iqbal Mohamed
Ind
Dewsbury and Batley
Question
Given past data on poverty levels before the current Labour government, does the right hon. Lady acknowledge that previous administrations also struggled with similar issues?
Minister reply
The hon. Member's figures reflect relative poverty, but getting people into work remains the best solution for reducing poverty.
Question
Does the Secretary of State foresee additional tax increases as a result of the Government’s fiscal mismanagement?
Minister reply
Given the Government's refusal to commit to not raising taxes, it is likely they will. Labour MPs are increasingly emboldened to push for further welfare changes.
Neil Coyle
Lab
Bermondsey and Old Southwark
Question
With the Leader of the Opposition's focus on cutting the budget, can she specify what exactly will be cut?
Minister reply
We aim to reduce unemployment rates as part of our welfare reform strategy.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that a more thorough review should precede any significant welfare reforms?
Minister reply
My right hon. Friend makes an excellent point regarding the need for comprehensive reviews before implementing major welfare changes.
Sorcha Eastwood
Alliance
Lagan Valley
Question
Does she agree that we have a decision to make in this House today? Do we stand alongside some of the most vulnerable—people who feel that politics cannot deliver for them?
Torbay
Question
I associate myself with the speech just made by the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell). The Liberal Democrats will be supporting the reasoned amendment that we are now debating.
Question
Is the hon. Member saying that he regrets the Liberal Democrat-Conservative coalition establishing PIP and abolishing disability living allowance? The Leader of the Opposition gave the example of someone with Parkinson’s. Someone with Parkinson’s who is over 65 could be on DLA, PIP and attendance allowance. Does he regret that decision?
Carla Lockhart
DUP
Upper Bann
Question
The Secretary of State has claimed that she is listening. Does the hon. Member agree that she is certainly not listening to many of her Back Benchers, nor the 86 disability charities that have said this Bill will harm disabled people? We all know that reform is needed, but when we talk about reform, there is no mention of the fraud that goes on within the system that is costing our country billions. Surely we should start with that and not impact on and affect the most vulnerable in our society. We will be voting against this Bill today for that reason.
Question
The hon. Lady is always fair-minded in the Chamber and outside. She will recognise that 2.5 million, or perhaps as many as 3 million, more disabled people entered the workforce under the last Conservative Government. Does she share my concerns that the Bill could undermine the ability of people with disabilities to enter the labour market?
Minister reply
We have to ensure that that does not happen. There are risks: I am being very honest about that.
Melanie Onn
Lab
Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes
Question
Just last week, the Health Secretary made an announcement about redirecting health support to the more deprived areas. Does my hon. Friend welcome that, and does she think it will help to improve the health outcomes of people in those areas?
Minister reply
I have not yet seen the details, but it is a subject that I raised, and, as we know, the funding will follow.
Maya Ellis
Lab
Ribble Valley
Question
Will my hon. Friend give way?
Minister reply
No—I am sorry, but I will not get an extra minute.
Stuart Anderson
Con
North Dorset
Question
Given the rather botched way in which the Government have dealt with this issue and the U-turn that is proving to be unsatisfactory, does my hon. Friend agree that the Government will just move away from any meaningful reform, deeming it to be too difficult or too hot to handle? That does no service to those who are in receipt of benefits, and it is certainly of no benefit to taxpayers.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right.
Simon Hoare
Con
North Dorset
Question
Given the rather botched way in which the Government have dealt with this issue and the U-turn that is proving to be unsatisfactory, does my hon. Friend agree that the Government will just move away from any meaningful reform, deeming it to be too difficult or too hot to handle? That does no service to those who are in receipt of benefits, and it is certainly of no benefit to taxpayers.
Minister reply
My hon. Friend is right.
Iqbal Mohamed
Lab
Walthamstow
Question
Does the Member want to give way?
Minister reply
I am sorry, but I am concluding my comments.
South Devon
Question
Does my hon. Friend agree that these changes risk devastating consequences for people living with complex mental health conditions?
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend for that incredibly important point. Whether it is motor neurone disease, blindness, ME, arthritis, mental illness or cancer, these barriers will only be further entrenched should the Bill be passed.
Scott Arthur
Lab
Edinburgh South West
Question
Can the hon. Gentleman confirm what he thinks is the extent of the cut?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Member for his comments, but these are the voices of my constituents, whom I am here to represent. Labour Members can talk about the coalition Government all they want, but I am talking about the here and now, and Members of this House will be judged on which Lobby they vote in later.
Dan Carden
Lab
Liverpool Walton
No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.
John Glen
Con
Salisbury
Question
I wanted to speak in this debate to try to get behind some of the headlines and challenges that those on the Government Benches face in getting to a settled view today
Yuan Yang
Lab
Earley and Woodley
Question
Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that constituents rely on PIP due to previous government cuts to council funding for services such as bus routes and social care?
Minister reply
I reciprocate the hon. Lady’s warm sentiments, acknowledging some of her political points may be valid in certain circumstances.
Ian Sollom
Lib Dem
St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire
Question
Terrified, anxious, and angry are the words heard most since these changes were proposed. The Government’s proposals will create a fundamentally unjust two-tier system despite protecting existing claimants.
Minister reply
While we understand the need for reform, we also recognise the concerns of disabled people and their carers. However, our approach exposes a lack of compassion, making it difficult to see that the Government is treating them as humans.
Meg Hillier
Lab/Co-op
Hackney South and Shoreditch
Question
One week ago, this Bill meant over 300,000 people feared losing their PIP through reassessment. Thanks to discussions in good faith, the Government has agreed to protect existing claimants so they can relax knowing they are secure.
Minister reply
While acknowledging some positive steps, we need to address the fiscal imperative and prepare for potential tax rises due to autumn's budget forecasts.
Melanie Ward
Lab
Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy
Question
Throughout this process, I have focused primarily on the impact of these changes on people with severe disabilities who are unable to work. Originally, the Bill would have made those people worse off, but does my hon. Friend agree that the Government’s changes ensure their income will be genuinely protected in real terms?
Minister reply
I completely agree with my hon. Friend. That was one of the biggest concerns I had with the Bill and why so many Members stood up to say they did not want it to go ahead on those terms, but the Government listened.
Barry Gardiner
Lab
Brent West
Question
My hon. Friend raises an important point about cost shunting—the way cuts in one area have forced people to claim in other areas and raised costs. Does she think it is important that the Government address those areas where cuts were made, before reducing support for new claimants?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend raises a vital point. Cost shunting can work both ways, so it is crucial that the Timms review examines this issue. If this Government are serious about mission-led government and working across Departments, they must involve the Department of Health and Social Care and others.
Adnan Hussain
Ind
Blackburn
Question
The hon. Member talks about the previous Government. Does she agree that politics is about choices? This Government have chosen cruelty by targeting the elderly, children, sick, and disabled people.
Minister reply
I am absolutely clear that government is about choices, but when a party is in government, it has to make choices to run the country. I would rather see a Labour Government, as divided parties do not hold power or government.
Peter Bedford
Con
Mid Leicestershire
Question
So there we have it: a Prime Minister not in control, a Work and Pensions Secretary with her hands tied behind her back, and a Chancellor scrambling to balance the books after reckless spending. This Bill does not achieve the £5 billion of savings originally intended and leaves us with a two-tier system.
Battersea
Question
The social security system should be a safety net for those most in need, but after 14 years of the Conservatives, it has been left with gaping holes. Disabled people suffered the most harm under previous Conservative Governments and their coalition partners.
Kirsty Blackman
SNP
Aberdeen North
Question
Too much of what we have discussed today has not centred disabled people, the Bill or the changes that we are being asked to vote on. We are being asked to vote on the Second Reading of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill...
Richard Burgon
Lab
Leeds East
Question
I wish that we were not here today. We do not need to be here today. There is nothing special or magical about this Tuesday—nothing at all...
Mid Sussex
Question
I want to begin today not with statistics or slogans, but with the reality of just one life: a constituent of mine, Sarah, from Hassocks. Sarah has a spinal cord injury...
Deirdre Costigan
Lab
Ealing Southall
Question
Does my hon. Member share my concern about the fate of unpaid carers, given that carer’s allowance hinges on a disabled person receiving PIP?
Tiverton and Minehead
Question
Does my hon. Friend share my concern about the fate of unpaid carers, given that carer’s allowance hinges on a disabled person receiving PIP? With one in five people in my constituency who are disabled, which is well above the national average, should the Secretary of State commit to delinking carer’s allowance from PIP eligibility?
Cat Smith
Lab
Lancaster and Wyre
Question
As Chair of the Procedure Committee, I am often asked about how we legislate in this House. Many Members, and members of the public, have approached me about the speed with which the Bill is being pushed through...
Cat Smith
Lab
Lancaster and Wyre
Question
Does the hon. Member agree that voting against the Bill would mean denying £725 extra to those on universal credit?
Marie Tidball
Lab
Penistone and Stocksbridge
Question
In March 2020, when the Conservative Government appeared to pursue a herd immunity strategy, did the hon. Member feel fear for her disabled constituents?
Emily Darlington
Lab
Milton Keynes Central
Question
Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the issues with the points system is that it does not take gender into account?
Bobby Dean
LD
Carshalton and Wallington
Question
The Secretary of State talked earlier about a better tomorrow, but her proposals mean discounting the value of tomorrow’s disabled, suggesting they are less worthy of support than today’s. The Bill will push hundreds of thousands of people into poverty by 2029. How can anyone in this place look at that figure and truly believe that the Government are making these reforms to help people rather than to balance the books?
Matthew Patrick
Lab
Wirral West
Question
At the heart of any progressive society is a simple test: how do we support people when they are most in need? The duty of the Government is to create a safety net—one that is wide enough to break people’s fall, but not so wide that they can never escape it. We have a consensus in this House that the system is failing, and people are right to ask how we can fix it.
Minister reply
Given that legacy, is it any wonder that people worry when they hear about reforms? I do not blame them, but we need to fix the situation. We are delivering an extra £29 billion each year for our NHS to bring down waiting times, with a 10-year plan on the way. We will provide mental health services in every school, breakfast clubs and free school lunches so that we can help future generations.
Robbie Moore
Con
Keighley and Ilkley
No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.
Ben Maguire
LD
North Cornwall
Question
The hon. Member is giving a great speech. He highlights the ridiculous two-tier system that the Government are setting up, whereby it is fine for existing claimants but not fine for future claimants. My North Cornwall constituents, Dennis and Jill from Bude, already face a similar two-tier system: they do not qualify for the carer’s allowance because they are of pensionable age. Does he agree that we should be expanding the system rather than narrowing it?
Minister reply
I am sure that Dennis and Jill will be looking at the debate carefully and understanding clearly the issue of fairness, which is at the heart of what this legislation addresses. As I have explained, it is a scenario that Shane, in my constituency, is experiencing: he is able to receive PIP today, but someone in a similar circumstance to him will not be able to receive it after late 2026. That is not fair.
Chichester
Question
Lauren, from my constituency, is a bright and determined 16-year-old young woman, who has just completed her GCSEs and came to do work experience in my office. She has cerebral palsy and is applying for PIP not because she wants a handout, but because she knows that she will need support to live independently and pursue a career and life ambitions that will probably bring her to this place at some point, if she gets her way. Does the hon. Member agree that young disabled people deserve clarity and dignity, and that this Bill is not giving them that?
Minister reply
This Bill gives no clarity or dignity to the many people such as the constituent the hon. Lady kindly mentions, or those in my constituency of Keighley and Ilkley. That is why I do not support a plan that creates such a two-tier system, which now seems to be the hallmark of this Labour Government and goes against the very principle of fairness.
John Lamont
Con
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk
Question
My hon. Friend is making an excellent speech. Does he agree that the Labour Government’s proposals are creating the worst of both worlds? On one hand, they are failing to tackle the rising welfare budget, but on the other they are creating anxiety and fear among many disabled and vulnerable people, who do not understand or know the impact of these changes on them?
Minister reply
That is the nub of why there is so much concern that has been consistently raised by all Members on the Conversative Benches, and many on the Government Benches as well, who, dare I say, are considering how they will vote later.
Jamie Stone
LD
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross
Question
Thus far, I have kept out of this debate, probably for the wrong reason, but my wife has been disabled for 26 years and is in receipt of PIP. Although I became an MP in 2017, as a family, we were deeply grateful for the support. My wife is an honest lady—I hope I do not embarrass her by saying that—and she would have been delighted to have been consulted about PIP, as set out by the hon. Member for Lewisham North (Vicky Foxcroft). She would have put her thoughts down on paper, and I am sure that many recipients of PIP would have said, “Yes, we will try to see if we can help to get the budget straight in some way.” That way, the Government would take people with them; that is important and we are missing that.
Minister reply
Trust is at the heart of the issue, and if we want to create a system that commands public trust, this is not the way to do it. We need to reward effort and promote self-reliance, but the Bill creates a two-tier system detached from individual responsibility. We need to make the welfare system more targeted, but the Bill, like many Government policies, simply shifts new costs on to people who will genuinely be ill, newly disabled or simply younger and does little to target those relying on the state.
Question
The hon. Member talks about fairness and trust. I wonder if he is proud of his Government’s record, where Tory cuts to welfare pushed more people into poverty, with 2.9 million emergency food parcels in the last 12 months. If he votes against the Bill, he will be voting against the biggest uplift in the UC standard allowance. Is he proud of that?
Minister reply
I will take no lectures from somebody who supported a 10% rise in council tax across the Bradford district, impacting many of those who will be impacted by PIP.
Deirdre Costigan
Party Not Provided
Constituency Not Provided
Question
Does the Minister welcome that the new proposals include £1.3 billion for investment in the get Britain working trailblazer programme, and that this help will be rolled out to every disabled person who wants a job?
Minister reply
The commitment to bring forward employment support is helpful and has been effective previously.
Helen Hayes
Lab
Ealing North
Question
I welcome the bringing forward of employment support, but we have yet to see it bed in. I also have concerns about the impact on young people, particularly 16 to 22-year-olds with mental health issues, and care-experienced individuals.
Minister reply
The Government is committed to supporting young people through various initiatives and addressing their specific needs.
Siân Berry
Green
Brighton Pavilion
Question
This cruel mistake of a Bill must fall today. The proposals are a mess, the timetable breakneck, and it shows that this is about making cuts rather than improving social security.
Clive Lewis
Lab
Norwich South
Question
The welfare bill is not growing because of individual failings but due to fundamental issues in the economy and society caused by 14 years of cuts under the Conservatives. Jobs are less secure, wages do not meet basic costs, and there is a soaring mental health crisis.
Robin Swann
UUP
South Antrim
Question
Asked about the impact of the bill on young people with disabilities transitioning to PIP from DLA, stating that the process ignores those who may not meet the four-point eligibility test and discussed concerns raised by Mencap.
Minister reply
The minister committed to reviewing the issues raised regarding the transition criteria for young people moving from Children's Disability Living Allowance to Personal Independence Payment. He emphasised the need for further engagement and co-production with stakeholders to ensure support systems are effective.
Andrew Pakes
Lab
Peterborough
Question
Expressed concerns about delayed changes in welfare reform affecting young people's opportunities, questioned the government's commitment to delivering employment support and simplifying benefit processes for young people.
Minister reply
The minister confirmed that the Government will focus on embedding co-production through a review process led by the Timms review. He announced that clause 5 of the Bill would be removed in Committee to ensure changes are made following the review's conclusions.
Question
Asked about accelerating the timetable for the Timms review so that a package of measures can be implemented by November 2026.
Minister reply
The minister indicated willingness to consider speeding up the review process if it would help deliver better support and outcomes for disabled people, including young individuals transitioning from DLA to PIP.
Iqbal Mohamed
Ind
Dewsbury and Batley
Question
My question to the Secretary of State is: can she explain to my constituents who designed this four-point system? Who defined the criteria by which somebody would qualify or not qualify?
Imran Hussain
Lab
Bradford East
Question
While I welcome the previous concessions and today’s concession, we have been talking about this for months, and we could have been engaged in the process. We approached it in good faith, and this piecemeal approach makes a further mockery of a process that will result in hundreds of thousands of people being pushed into poverty...
Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe
Question
What an excellent and powerful speech to follow. We should all be here to stand up for the dignity of people who need us to stand up for them...
Claire Hughes
Lab
Bangor Aberconwy
Question
Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the substantial package of mental health support announced by the Welsh Labour Government this weekend, including £5.6 million to tackle the long waiting list for children awaiting diagnosis for conditions such as hyperactivity disorder and autism, is to be welcomed?
Paula Barker
Lab
Liverpool Wavertree
Question
While I am grateful for the concessions, this has further laid bare the incoherent and shambolic nature of the process. It is the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen. In the Liverpool city region, nearly 30% of residents are disabled—more than 10% above the national average. This Bill still entails cuts, not reform. It will see 150,000 people pushed further into poverty, and create a stark disparity in our welfare state for disabled people.
Kim Johnson
Lab
Liverpool Riverside
Question
Does she agree that the fact that we have been denied the opportunity to scrutinise the Bill denies us the opportunity to make it right for disabled people?
Minister reply
I thank my hon. Friend for her excellent intervention, and I absolutely concur with her views.
Ann Davies
PC
Caerfyrddin
Question
The Government have withdrawn clause 5, but under clause 6 the legislation will still apply in Northern Ireland. Are the Government going to put a barrier down the Irish sea with regard to PIP?
Minister reply
I could not possibly comment.
Diane Abbott
Lab
Hackney North and Stoke Newington
Question
Millions of disabled people will listen, view or read about this debate and its consequences, and feel fear. For some Members of the House, this is just an afternoon’s political cut and thrust, but for the disabled it is the rest of their lives.
Shockat Adam
Ind
Leicester South
Question
I have been sitting here for over four or five hours, and there have been so many changes and concessions that I really do not know what we will be voting on. This is no way to bring in a Bill, when it is so important to people’s lives.
Gill German
Lab
Clwyd North
Question
The Bill will raise the universal credit standard allowance by the largest increase since the 1970s. It will help 3.9 million families with an average gain of £265 a year, bringing us closer, finally, to ensuring that every family can afford the essentials without relying on charity or community support.
Ian Byrne
Lab
Liverpool West Derby
Question
This vote tonight is on the Bill that we have in front of us, which includes restricting eligibility for PIP. Even with what the Minister has just said, three quarters of a million low-paid, sick and disabled people will lose the health element of universal credit, costing them £3,000 on average.
Chris McDonald
Lab
Stockton North
Question
I am pleased to see that the Bill will address that by removing the need for reassessment and protecting existing claimants. I thank the Minister for Social Security and Disability as well as other Ministers for listening to me when I have raised the concerns of my constituents...
Lola McEvoy
Lab
Darlington
Question
My hon. Friend is giving a passionate speech about our region. Does he agree that although lots of people would like to contribute, for too long the workplace has not been disability-friendly?
Ian Lavery
Lab
Blyth and Ashington
Question
I have to say that I am absolutely amazed at what has happened, even just this afternoon. Like many people in this place, I have been totally ignored when saying anything about this Bill... The Bill is not fit for purpose...
Darren Paffey
Lab
Southampton Itchen
Question
I speak as a signatory to the reasoned amendment tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney South and Shoreditch, because I recognised, as many across the House did, that there were serious problems with the original version of the Bill...
Gareth Snell
Lab/Co-op
Stoke-on-Trent Central
Question
I wonder whether my hon. Friend shares my hope that, when the Minister sums up this evening he will categorically state that those people grandfathered in today, to help get past that clause 5 moment in the Bill, will still be grandfathered in without clause 5 and despite whatever comes out of the Timms review, so that they are not put back into the pool of potentially being reassessed in the future. I am also concerned about the lack of a defined timetable for the report and the removal of November 2026 as a hard deadline.
Minister reply
Darren Paffey responds to acknowledge the point but does not provide a specific commitment, indicating that such assurances will be part of the debate's conclusion.
Question
If November 2026 is not a hard deadline any more, why do the Government need to push this Bill through today? Why does it have to get through before the summer recess so that it can go to the Lords in order that it can be in place before November 2026 if that date no longer matters?
Minister reply
Most of the answer to that question is obviously a matter for the Minister, but I do not want to delay the uplift in universal credit, so I am willing to vote that through today.
John McDonnell
Ind
Hayes and Harlington
Question
Can the Minister assure that the outcome of the Timms review will be implemented in primary legislation?
Minister reply
The outcome of the review will depend on its recommendations, but it will not necessarily require primary legislation.
Alison Hume
Lab
Scarborough and Whitby
Question
Will clause 5, which specifically references the need for claimants to score four points in order to receive the daily living allowance, be removed from the Bill?
Minister reply
Yes, clause 5 will be removed from the Bill.
Question
Is it not best to withdraw the Bill and start again due to confusion expressed both in Parliament and the country?
Minister reply
No, the Bill is necessary as it deals with work disincentives inserted into universal credit by the previous government.
Peter Lamb
Lab
Crawley
Question
Will the Timms review take place within a spending envelope?
Minister reply
The review is not intended to save money; its purpose is to get the assessment right and make sure it will be fit for the future.
Question
The Minister is doing an admirable job defending the farcical. Last week, there were £5 billion of savings. Today, there were £2.5 billion of savings. Then he came to the Dispatch Box and did three more U-turns. As he stands at that Dispatch Box today, how much will these new measures save the taxpayer?
Minister reply
We will set out those figures in the usual way.
Question
When talking about whether measures will be put in primary legislation, Members cannot amend things if they are not included. That is a key concern when we do not know the outcome of the review.
Minister reply
My answer to my hon. Friend is the one I gave earlier: we need to await the outcome of the review and the assessment that it develops to determine whether it will be implemented in primary or secondary legislation.
Helen Whately
Con
Faversham and Mid Kent
Question
In light of the shambles this afternoon, with the Bill being ripped apart literally before our eyes in this Chamber and the Minister unable even to tell us how much it will now save, can you please advise me whether it should still be rushed through to be debated next week in Committee of the whole House, or whether the Government should in fact withdraw it?
Minister reply
The scheduling of business is a matter for the Government.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.