Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill 2025-07-01

Question

Will the Minister give way?

Question

Will the Minister give way?

Question

Why do her Government’s figures show that actions will put an extra 150,000 people into poverty?

Question

Will she publish further assessments that provide a more accurate view?

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?

Question

Will my right hon. Friend give way?

Question

The £300 million investment is built off the back of WorkWell pilots; are they planning to continue them?

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?

Question

Will the review guarantee that disabled people and their organisations are key voices in shaping future policies impacting them?

Question

Has the Government sought legal advice on whether it is lawful to treat individuals with similar conditions differently within the benefits system?

Question

Given the disruption caused by covid, can we all agree that in-person assessments should be prioritised and resumed quickly?

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.

Question

Is it true that the Chancellor bears significant responsibility for this welfare fiasco, given her lack of foresight?

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?

Question

Will the Secretary of State provide clarity on her position regarding these reforms?

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?

Question

Does the Secretary of State foresee additional tax increases as a result of the Government’s fiscal mismanagement?

Question

With the Leader of the Opposition's focus on cutting the budget, can she specify what exactly will be cut?

Question

Does the Secretary of State agree that a more thorough review should precede any significant welfare reforms?

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?

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?

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?

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?

Question

Will my hon. Friend give way?

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.

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.

Question

Does the Member want to give way?

Question

Does my hon. Friend agree that these changes risk devastating consequences for people living with complex mental health conditions?

Question

Can the hon. Gentleman confirm what he thinks is the extent of the cut?

No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.

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

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?

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.

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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...

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...

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...

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?

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?

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...

Question

Does the hon. Member agree that voting against the Bill would mean denying £725 extra to those on universal credit?

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?

Question

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the issues with the points system is that it does not take gender into account?

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?

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.

No extracted contribution text available for this contributor yet.

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?

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?

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?

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Question

Asked about accelerating the timetable for the Timms review so that a package of measures can be implemented by November 2026.

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?

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...

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...

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?

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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?

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...

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...

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.

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?

Question

Can the Minister assure that the outcome of the Timms review will be implemented in primary legislation?

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?

Question

Is it not best to withdraw the Bill and start again due to confusion expressed both in Parliament and the country?

Question

Will the Timms review take place within a spending envelope?

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?

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.

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?