Afternoon summary
Keir Starmer has called a Cobra meeting following the stabbing of two Jewish men in Golders Green, north London. For more coverage, you can read Tom Ambrose’s live blog.
For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.
Sarwar sets out Scottish Labour's priorities for 1st 100 days in government, including declaring waiting times emergency
Anas Sarwar is vowing to show Scots “what change looks like” within the first 100 days of a Labour government, if he wins next week’s Holyrood election, the Press Association reports. PA says:
The Scottish Labour leader is setting out his plans for the first 100, should his party be successful in ousting John Swinney’s SNP from power on 7 May.
A week out from polling day, Sarwar appealed to voters to give him five years in power to “fix the mess” he said was caused by almost 20 years of the SNP in power.
A Scottish Labour government would declare a waiting times emergency within its first 100 days – with Sarwar adding plans would also be drawn up to ensure patients are treated wherever there is capacity.
If the conflict in the Gulf continues, he is also promising a £100m of emergency support to help with the cost of living – with this including proposals to bring down the price of petrol and diesel at the pump and support for businesses.
In addition, Scottish Labour would transfer the first £70m into a new fund for councils to repair potholes on the roads, ban mobile phones in Scotland’s classrooms and end the SNP’s “ideological” ban on new nuclear power stations.
Labour also says it would create a new ending homelessness unit in the first 100 days, to start work to end rough-sleeping, create a Scottish Treasury in a bid to boost government efficiency and cut waste, and work with CalMac and others to prevent a “summer ferry crisis” from hitting Scotland’s islands.
Tories and pensions industry welcome concession leading to passing of Pension Schemes Act
The Conservatives have welcomed what they describe as a government U-turn that has led to the passing of the Pension Schemes Act. (See 10.53am.)
Commenting on the announcement last night, Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, said:
Rachel Reeves wanted unfettered control over more than £400bn of private pension savings. But we have cut Labour’s pensions power grab off at the knees … Crucially, the bill now protects fiduciary duty – the foundation upon which trust in our pension system rests. In any conflict between savers’ interests and minister’s ambitions, savers will now win. We welcome the government’s U-turn on this fundamental flaw in the bill.
Pensions UK, which represents the pensions industry, has also welcomed the concession. Julian Mund, its chief executive, said:
The passage of the Pension Schemes Act is a victory for pension savers.
The legislation enacts a series of critical reforms that will improve the value savers get from pensions and make the system easier to navigate for employers and savers.
The power that enables government to direct how schemes invest has been drastically scaled back, with amendments built around demands Pensions UK has made from day one.
Describing what the act will do, Pensions UK says:
The legislation delivers a series of positive reforms that we expect to increase the value schemes can deliver and, in doing so, improve retirements for millions.
This includes a requirement on schemes to deliver incomes from pension savings at retirement, rather than leaving savers to make complex decisions by themselves. The bill enables the automatic consolidation of small pension pots, saving money and making the system simpler to navigate for savers. And it underpins the new Value for Money framework, which should enable employers to choose schemes based on overall value, not just price.
Parliament prorogues, with hereditary peers sitting in Lords for last time
Parliament has been formally prorogued, marking the end of hereditary peers in the House of Lords, the Press Association reports. PA says:
The announcement formally ending the current parliamentary session was read out on behalf of King Charles at a traditional ceremony in the House of Lords today, attended by both MPs and peers.
The event marks the last time hereditary peers will sit in the upper chamber.
Since 1999, 92 hereditary peers have been able to sit in the Lords and cast their vote.
Under the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Act, that number has been effectively reduced to zero – although several have subsequently been allowed to continue sitting as life peers.
Ahead of the prorogation, Lords Speaker Lord Forsyth of Drumlean paid tribute to those losing their seats on the red benches.
He said: “At the conclusion of this session, those noble lords who sit by virtue of hereditary peerages will cease to be members of this House.
“On behalf of the house, I pay tribute to their distinguished service and offer them our sincere thanks.”
MPs, led by Speaker Lindsay Hoyle, filed out of the Commons after their attendance in the upper chamber was requested by Black Rod Ed Davis – the senior officer responsible for ceremonial protocol.
The royal address, read out by the Lords Leader Lady Smith of Basildon, set out legislation passed during the parliamentary session and other measures taken by the Government.
A royal commission, comprising five peers, signalled nine new laws have received royal assent as the current parliamentary session comes to an end.
As each act was read out, the clerk said in Norman French “Le Roy le veult” or “The King wills it”, to indicate royal approval.
These were: the National Insurance Contributions (Employer Pensions Contributions) Act; the Grenfell Tower Memorial (Expenditure) Act; the Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Act; the Tobacco and Vapes Act; the Victims and Courts Act; the Crime and Policing Act; the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act; the Pension Schemes Act; and the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Act.
MPs and peers will return on 13 May for the king’s speech, which will set out the government’s future legislative agenda.
Gordon Brown calls for inquiry into Andrew's trade envoy spending, saying ex-prince wanted fleet of planes for royals
Gordon Brown has revealed that, when he was chancellor, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor tried to persuade him to get the government to fund a fleet of aircaft for sole use by the royal family.
The former prime minister disclosed the request, which he refused, in a long article for the New Statesman in which he also calls for an inquiry into how Mountbatten-Windsor used public funds when he was a trade envoy.
In February Mountbatten-Windsor was arrested following the publication in the US of documents in the Jeffrey Epstein files suggesting that, when Mountbatten-Windsor was trade envoy, he improperly shared government information. He has not been charged, and it is understood that he denies wrongdoing.
Brown has already called for an inquiry into the UK links to Epstein’s sex trafficking operation in an article for the New Statesman published two months ago.
Today he has gone further, saying there is also a need for an inquiry into how Mountbatten-Windsor used public funds while doing the trade job between 2001 and 2011.
In a new article for the New Statesman, Brown says:
The investigation into Andrew should also consider his use of public funds. Police must now interview officials and ask for records from three government departments, the Ministry of Defence, the Department for Business and Trade, and the Foreign Office, all involved in managing his trips while serving as UK trade envoy.
While serving as trade envoy, the former prince regularly used RAF flights. We must now question whether public funds were used in pursuit not just of his public duties, but of his alleged private liaisons and even private business arrangements.
Brown says that at one point as PM he asked a business minister to speak to Mountbatten-Windsor about the “unacceptable costs” he was incurring in his envoy role. “I was told that his response was to ask whether the government seriously believed that he should have to travel on commercial flights,” Brown says.
Earlier Brown says Mountbatten-Windsor proposed a different solution to his travel difficulties.
When I was chancellor, I received a request at Andrew’s instigation for a Royal Fleet, solely available for the use of the royal family, separate from the RAF. Emails in the Epstein files show the then prince claiming credit for having secured the privatisation of helicopters used by the royal family. Now, Andrew wanted the same arrangement for airplanes. The then prince’s proposal was that the government pay for the royal family franchising its own fleet of planes. The costs seemed prohibitive. I turned down his proposal and reported directly to the Queen that the country could not afford such a plan.
Brown says he would like to see the British authorities “re-interview Andrew, not just over possible breaches of the Official Secrets Act, but over his use of public funds”. He also says “a select committee in parliament should examine how public funds were used, and whether a cover-up took place that prevented Andrew from being interviewed by US investigators”.
Torsten Bell, the pensions minister, has posted these on social media criticising saying Kemi Badenoch was talking “nonsense” at PMQs about employment and welfare. (See 12.04pm.)
She also straight forward lied in claiming the number of unemployed people claiming benefits was up 1.5m - when she knows that number is largely about people transferring from legacy benefits onto UC. I’m sure she’ll be referring herself to the privileges committee any moment now
Davey calls for inquiry into US interference in UK politics
At his press conference, as well as announcing proposed amendments to the representation of the people bill (see 2.05pm and 2.17pm), Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, called for an inquiry into foreign interference in UK politics from the US.
He said:
The threats are there. Hiding in plain sight. And we ignore them at our peril.
Donald Trump – whose National Security Strategy used far right-tropes about “civilizational erasure” and talked about “cultivating resistance” in Europe.
Who tried his hardest to keep Viktor Orbán in power in Hungary – even trying to bribe the Hungarian people with a promise of money from the US.
And how wonderful it was to see the Hungarian people throw that back in Trump’s face.
But it’s clear that Trump and his team want to try the same thing here, with Nigel Farage as their man.
And Farage gave the game away recently didn’t he – calling Trump “the boss at Mar-a-Lago”.
We know who’s pulling his strings.
But it’s more insidious than that too.
With Trump’s state department plotting to funnel money to Reform via so-called thinktanks.
No wonder we see Farage and Reform importing so much of Trump’s destructive and divisive agenda –
From rolling back gun laws to taking free healthcare away.
Anti-vaccine conspiracy theories to get-rich-quick crypto scams.
That is Trump’s America. We can’t let it become Farage’s Britain …
The government commissioned the Rycroft Review but has so far committed to implement just two of the seventeen recommendations. It should act on them all in full, urgently.
To defend our democracy from Putin, Iran – all those who want to destroy it.
But sadly, we must also guard against the new threat from Trump and Maga.
The government should also set up a dedicated inquiry into foreign interference from the United States. So we can stop it.
UK expels Russian diplomat and summons ambassador in tit-for-tat move
The UK is expelling a Russian diplomat and summoning ambassador Andrey Kelin in a tit-for-tat move following similar action by Moscow last month, the Press Assocation reports. PA says:
The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) said it was taking “reciprocal action” for Russia’s “unjustified” decision in March to remove a British diplomat from the country.
A government spokesperson said: “We strongly condemn Russia’s unjustified decision last month to expel another British diplomat and the malicious public smear campaign that followed. This behaviour is wholly unacceptable, and we will not tolerate harassment or intimidation of our diplomatic staff.
“We have therefore summoned the Russian ambassador to announce we are taking reciprocal action, revoking the accreditation of a Russian diplomat.
“Russia’s repeated unprovoked and unjustified actions are designed to disrupt our diplomatic work and form part of a wider campaign of aggressive behaviour towards the UK.
“Any further action by Russia will be treated as an escalation and met with a firm and proportionate response.”
Q: What do you say to critics who say you spend too much time doing political stunts?
Davey says this is about focusing attention on policy. He says he will be on a tractor tomorrow. But he will be talking about food prices, which are going to go up because of the Iran war. The government is not doing anything about this, he says.
He says England is the only country in Europe that does not use farm payments to help farmers produce food. He says he raised this at PMQs.
If he gets on a tractor, cameras will turn up, and he will get a chance to talk about policy, he says.
Q: What are your views on a cap on political donations and on state funding for political parties?
Davey says the Lib Dems have always been in favour of a cap on political donations.
During the coalition, the Lib Dems tried to reform party political finance. But they failed because the Tories and Labour were both opposed, he says.
Q: How would you implement your proposed ban on politicians taking money from X?
Davey says this would be for Ofcom to regulate.
Q: Why are Reform UK doing better than the Lib Dems in the polls.
Davey says he likes it when the Lib Dems are fighting Reform UK, because the Lib Dems can beat Reform.
He cites Hull as an area where the Labour vote has collapsed, and he says the council battle there is between his party and Nigel Farage’s.
Q: Do you support Gordon Brown’s call for the police to reinterview Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor in relation to the Jeffrey Epstein scandal?
Davey says he would go furthern that Brown. He says he wants a public inquiry into the British aspects of the Epstein scandal.
Updated
Q: Should you be focusing on gaining votes, not stopping other parties get support?
Davey says the Lib Dems are winning under his leadership. But that does not mean they should not also try to stop foreign interference in elections too.
He says he is not just talking about Trump. He claims to be the only leader talking about social care, and he says the Lib Dems have also presented a costed package on cost of living issues.
Davey is now taking questions.
Q: The state visit is going well. Do you regret opposing it?
Davey says he has always supported the king, and the king has his support.
He pays tribute to the king’s “brilliant diplomacy” and says he has done a “wonderful job”.
But he says he is not sure this will have a lasting impact on how the US treats the UK.
Ed Davey accuses Reform UK of operating Maga 'franchise', saying democracy under threat from Trump-style politics
Davey turns to the subject of the press conference.
Referring to next week’s election, he says:
As we see British democracy in action, we also need to recognise that our democracy is under more serious threat than at any point in my lifetime.
The threat from powerful men outside our country who are trying to destroy it – Donald Trump, Elon Musk, Vladimir Putin.
And the threat from those inside our politics – Nigel Farage, Rupert Lowe, Reform UK – who are aiding and abetting that destruction.
Let me be direct about what is happening.
Nigel Farage and Reform UK are not a British political movement.
They are a franchise. A franchise of Trump’s Maga politics.
Copying their tactics. Collaborating with their people. Taking Musk’s money. And carrying water for the Kremlin.
This is not the type of politics we want in our country. These are not the values we want in our communities. And these are not the people we want running our councils.
Trying to turn our great country into an outpost of Trump’s Maga empire. What a bleak vision that is for our United Kingdom.
Updated
Ed Davey is speaking at his press conference now.
He starts by saying that the scenes were are seeing Golders Green are “horrific” and that his heart goes out to the Jewish community.
Taz Ali is covering the reaction to the antisemitic attack in a separate live blog.
Lib Dems push for ban on MPs taking money from X, citing Maga threat
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, is about to hold a press conference. As Peter Walker reports, he will be pushing for a ban on MPs accepting payments from X as part of a proposed wider crackdown on what Davey will call a “serious threat” to UK democracy from Donald Trump’s US and other countries.
IPPR thinktank says £5m Farage gift highlights urgent need for cap on individual political donations
The IPPR, the left-leaning thinktank, says the Nigel Farage £5m donation revelation highlights the need for a cap on the value of individual political donations. It has been calling for a cap for a while, but Harry Quilter-Pinner, the IPPR’s executive director, said this story made the issue all the more pressing. In a statement he said:
It’s becoming harder to ignore the growing weight that extremely wealthy donors appear to carry in British politics, not just in scale, but in proximity to key political decisions.
Reports that Christopher Harborne provided Nigel Farage with £5m shortly before his change of stance on standing as an MP will inevitably prompt questions about influence, perception, and the standards we expect in public life.
Seven-figure sums entering politics were once exceptional, now they are commonplace. The government must act urgently, capping individual donations at £100,000, to protect the sanctity of our politics.
PMQs - snap verdict
That was scrappy, crude, score-draw sort of PMQs, influenced in part by the fact that the most important set of elections ahead of the next general election are taking place a week tomorrow. When Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch next face each, the political backdrop will be quite a different. Another reason why today’s proceedings will be quickly forgotten.
Badenoch chose to open with questions about welfare. We will be hearing a lot more about welfare policy during the next session of parliament and that won’t be easy for Labour. But in part there’s a silver lining; Badenoch and Nigel Farage (see 11.36am) are increasingly taking about this because, with legal migration falling steeply and small boat crossing numbers down significantly too, the issue that worked best for the rightwingers is losing its potency. (Migration Watch UK used to feature a tracker showing how small boat numbers were rising month by month very prominently on their website; they are still publishing the data, but now the figures are heading down, you will have to look a bit harder to find them.) On welfare, Badenoch was grotesquely simplifying the argument, but Starmer did not have an effective counterattack, and she was easily ahead at this point in the exchanges.
But the Tories are more interested in gunning for Rachel Reeves, the chancellor. Badenoch asked Starmer to sack Reeves and, when he ignored the question, she claimed his answer was significant. Today the Telegraph has splashed on a story speculating about a reshuffle after the May elections, and Sky’s Beth Rigby has a report saying there is a live debate in Starmer’s office about whether or not to go ahead with one. After PMQs the Tories released a comment from a spokesperson saying: “Everyone can see that Rachel Reeves is about to become the next person Starmer throws under a bus.” That is not impossible. But there was nothing in what Starmer said to Badenoch that amounts to evidence for this (it was not surprising he ignored her question), and it is a stretch for the Tories to count his response on this as a win.
Starmer was empty-handed on welfare but in his exchanges with Badenoch, and across PMQs more generally, he spoke repeatedly, and with pride, about the legislation passed this session. The government has had its failures, but it has had legislative successes too and he made that case reasonably well. He was withering about Badenoch’s own record as a leader but he seemed to be more genuinely outraged when responding to Ed Davey, and ridiculing his decision to join the Tory privileges committee “stunt”. Davey is normally quite effective at PMQs, but today he was left deflated.
Updated
Labour claims Farage's undeclared £5m donation broke parliamentary rules
The Labour party is also accusing Nigel Farage of breaking the rules on declaring political donations. (See 12.45pm.) In a statement, Anna Turley, the Labour chair, said:
Nigel Farage appears to have broken the rules again by failing to declare this cash from his billionaire backer.
Reform have repeatedly tried to dodge scrutiny over their deputy leader Richard Tice’s tax scandal. It’s simply not good enough for Reform to gloss over these egregious acts and further erode public trust in politics.
It’s just the latest alarming example of Farage and his MPs believing there is one rule for them and another for everyone else.
Farage reported to parliament's standards watchdog over undeclared £5m donation, as Tories say 'this stinks'
The Conservatives have announced that they are referring Nigel Farage to the parliamentary commissioner over the Guardian’s report saying he was given £5m by the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne shortly before announcing that he would be a candidate at the 2024 election.
Kevin Hollinrake, the Tory chair, said:
As a new member of parliament, Farage was obliged to report to the House of Commons all political donations and political gifts he had received during the previous 12 months.
The Conservatives are today referring Nigel Farage to the parliamentary standards commissioner.
This £5m from the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne raises serious questions. What is Nigel Farage hiding? And why does Reform think the rules don’t apply to them? This stinks and Reform should come clean now.
PMQs is over, but Catherine West (Lab) uses a point of order to say MPs will be concerned about the report of two Jewish men being stabbed in north London.
Starmer says he was told about this before PMQs. It is “deeply concerning”, he says. There is a police investigation, and the government will support it. He says the government is determined to stop attacks like this. There have been far too many of them recently, he says.
Updated
Sarah Gibson (Lib Dem) says she is trying to deal with a landfill site in her constituency producing sulphurous smells. But the Environment Agency is not doing anything about this?
Starmer says he will chase up this issue.
Pam Cox (Lab) says Labour MPs have passed 60 bills affecting all aspects of British life. Does the PM agree the best is yet to come?
Starmer says the government is only just getting started.
Lee Pitcher (Lab) asks about Doncast airport.
Starmer says he is deeply concerned about reports saying the Reform UK council is putting plans to reopen the airport in jeopardy.
Iqbal Mohamed (Ind) asks about the revelation that the Foriegn Office is closing a unit that monitors human rights breaches.
Starmer says the work of the Foreign Office’s human rights team will not end. “It not seem to be done by a different team under a restructure,” he says.
Starmer says the government is making real progress on the NHS. Waiting lists are at their lowest for three years, A&E waiting times their lowest for five years. This did not happen under the Tories.
Olly Glover (Lib Dem) asks if the government will abandon “the developer model” and look at Lib Dem plans for more social housing.
Starmer says the government is committed to building 1.5m new homes. He says the Lib Dems abstained on legislation for this.
Luke Evans (Con) asks why, if Starmer did nothing wrong, he got his MPs to vote against a privileges committee inquiry.
Starmer says it is because they can recognise a political stunt when they see one.
Natasha Irons (Lab) asks what Labour is doing for renters.
Starmer says he is proud to say no fault evictions will be illegal from Friday.
Anna Dixon (Lab) says when she campaigns, she is particularly proud of Labour’s record on breakfast clubs, free childcare and zero-hours contracts. What is Starmer most proud of?
Starmer says the government has extended workers’ rights, taken children out of poverty, and is dealing with a war on two fronts.
Rushanara Ali (Lab) asks about a life sciences investment.
Starmer says he is able to announce that AstraZeneca is confirming an investment in the UK today.
Updated
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, says this may be his final PMQs. (He is a candidate in the Holyrood elections.) It might be Starmer’s final PMQs too, he says. He says Starmer “promised change but has delivered chaos”.
Starmer says he is proud of his achievements. But what did Flynn do? He kicked out his predecessor, and then lost 39 MPs at the election.
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, says the UK ambassador said Israel is now the US’s strongest ally, and Starmer will soon lose his job. Having sacked one ambassador for lying, will he have to sack another for telling the truth?
Starmer says the ambassador’s words are the least of what he has had to worry about recently.
He says he was surprised the Lib Dems backed the Tory motion yesterday.
I expect frivolous accusations from the leader of the opposition. Clearly I was wrong to expect anything better from a man in a wetsuit.
Davey asks about food security.
Starmer says that is one of the issues he was talking about at Cobra yesterday. But instead of also focusing on this, Davey was wasting his time on a “baseless political stunt”.
Badenoch accuses Starmer of “pompous, tone-deaf moralising”. She claims all MPs saw Starmer “punch the speaker’s chair” after PMQs last week. She claims he is not a man i control. She says Starmer has lost all credibility. “How much longer do we all have to put up with his shambles?”
Starmer says he changed his party and won and election. He says Badenoch has changed his party too; it is now even smaller than when she became leader.
Badenoch says the PM did not say he would keep Reeves. She says Angela Rayner is on manoeuvres. And the PM is worried about the next move by the king of the north. It is like “a bad episode of Game of Thrones”.
Starmer accuses Badenoch of playing political games with the vote yesterday. Starmer was chairing a Cobra meeting, he says, dealing with the impact of the war in Iran. He says the Tories are just interested in “silly political games”
Badenoch says Labour has not got a defence investment plan. The government is borrowing to fund defence. And the chancellor is briefing out rent controls to curry favour with voters. Will the PM reshuffle the chancellor?
Starmer says interest rates have been cut. The cost of government borrowing has gone up because of the Iran war. And Badenoch wanted the UK to jump in with both feet.
Badenoch claims the government is spending more on welfare because of Starmer’s policy, and he says it cannot spend more on defence because of welfare spending.
Starmer says the Tories hollowed out defence.
Updated
Badenoch says 1.5m people are claiming universal credit since Labour took office.
(Many benefits claimants are being transferred from legacy benefits to UC, so the headline figure for increases in UC claims is misleading.)
Starmer says Labour is reforming the welfare system.
Kemi Badenoch says the end of the session is a contrast with the beginning of it. At the start Labour MPs were asking sycophantic questions. Yesterday Starmer had to beg them to save his own skin. Starmer has not grown the economy; the only thing that has grown is the welfare bill.
She asks how many people are claiming universal credit since Starmer became PM.
Starmer lists government achievements, and says he is proud of his record.
Keir Starmer starts PMQs by saying the state visit is a powerful reminder of the depth of the relationship with the US.
He says in this session of parliament Labour has delivered “the biggest upgrade in workers rights in a generation, the biggest improvement in renters rights in a generation,” and the biggest action by any government tackling child poverty.
Updated
Farage admits he had to 'admit defeat' on his original plan to lift two-child benefit cap because he was attacked as 'welfarist'
In his Today interview this morning, Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, also said that he had to “admit defeat” over a proposal to lift the two-child benefit cap for some types of families.
Last year Farage said Reform UK would lift the cap (now scrapped by Labour) to encourage families to have children. The Tories immediately attacked him as favouring high welfare spending, and Farage then revised the plan, saying his party would onnly lift the cap for British families with both parents working full-time. But even this left the party vulnerable to attack from the right, and in February Robert Jenrick said Reform UK would restore the two-child benefit cap in full after he was make Reform’s Treasury spokesperson.
Asked why he backed down, Farage said:
I made a mistake on this. I tried to do something pro-family. That’s obviously impossible in modern Britain.
What I said was I would like British working families where both people are in full-time work to get some tax credits if they had more kids. And, you know, for my sins, I was accused of being a welfarist. So I’ve had to admit defeat.
Asked who defeated him, Farage said “everybody” and “mass opinion”.
He also said his revised proposal was too nuanced for people to understand, and he sai that in politics it makes sense not to pick a fight on everything.
Starmer faces Badenoch at PMQs
Here is the running order for PMQs.
Exclusive: Nigel Farage was given undisclosed £5m by crypto billionaire in 2024
Nigel Farage was given £5m by the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne shortly before announcing he would stand in the 2024 British general election, Anna Isaac reports.
For more on Harborne, do read Tom Burgis’s excellent feature about him published at the weekend.
Farage backs calls from Blair's thinktank for significant cuts to benefits paid to people with some mental health conditions
Nigel Farage has said that he agrees with Tony Blair on the need for significant restrictions on sickness benefits paid to people with some mental health conditions.
Yesterday Blair’s thinktank, the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) published a report proposing “an emergency handbrake for UK welfare”. It said:
On a daily basis, nearly 1,000 people in Britain sign on to benefits. As part of the government’s effort to restore trust in the welfare system, we believe it could and should pull an emergency handbrake now that will slow the rise of claimants.
The handbrake is based on a simple idea: there are certain conditions that in the vast majority of cases do not limit an individual’s ability to work, and the default presumption should be that these “non-work-limiting” conditions no longer attract cash benefits.
Many of these conditions are those that have proliferated since the pandemic, particularly mental-health conditions. It is a handbrake that can be pulled now, using secondary legislation ahead of more significant reform later in this parliament.
The report did not set out a full definition of what a “non-work-limiting” condition might be, but it said the government should draw up a list and it added:
Government should start with conditions where the evidence is strongest but where objective assessment is hardest. People with conditions such as depression, anxiety and some musculoskeletal problems show clear benefits from being in work.
Alongside the handbrake, there should be “targeted health and employment support for those no longer eligible for long-term incapacity benefits”, the report said.
Explaining the potential benefits, the report said:
The potential gains from strengthening the welfare system’s gateways are substantial. If incapacity benefit claimant numbers had remained at prepandemic levels – as in most comparable countries – the welfare bill would be around £11.5bn lower by the end of this parliament. 4 And had the number of working-age Pip [personal independence payment] claimants remained at pre-Covid levels, spending would be around £19bn lower.
In an interview on the Today programme this morning, asked about the Blair proposals, Farage said that he agreed with the Blair report. He said:
Where I do agree, unusually, with Blair’s Institute is that conditions like mild anxiety just cannot qualify for disability benefit. We’re going to have to get tougher on this and not everyone’s going to like it.
Farage claimed people were being put on disability benefit with no need to look for work. He went on:
They can be signed on at a young age to these things. They can be told effectively as young men and women that they’re victims. And if you do that to people, they’re likely to stay victims for the rest of their lives. That is the point that I’m really trying to address.
The TBI report has been strongly criticised by disability campaigners. Charles Gillies, policy co-chair at the Disability Benefits Consortium and senior policy officer at the MS Society, said:
We’re really concerned that the Tony Blair Institute (TBI) are trying to force harmful benefit cuts onto the government’s agenda – something the PM was forced to backtrack on less than a year ago.
These plans are practically unworkable, would involve no parliamentary scrutiny and are based on a highly regressive view of disability.
The proposals would push many disabled people, potentially including those with MS, further into poverty and worsen their health.
We urge the government to remember that disabled people, campaigners and MPs didn’t stand for such harmful cuts last time, and to reject these proposals.
Updated
A reader asks:
Good morning all!
Remember to get your sunshine - it’s good for your sleep (regulates your body clock), your mood, your bones and teeth, just 10 minutes outside, on a cloudy day a little more
Let’s celebrate the sun and this wonderful planet we call home.
(yes I am for the first time listening to Radio Two - ‘Good News Wednesday’ with Vernon Kay and listeners giving voice notes of their good news experiences )
Andrew - might The Guardian have similar ?
We do. We have a weekly newsletter with good news updates, called the Upside. You can sign up here.
And you can read the Upside archive here.
Pension schemes bill to become law after Lords drop opposition following ministerial concessions
Peers backed down last night in a deadlock over the government’s proposed pension reforms after ministerial concessions, the Press Association reports. PA says:
The upper chamber had repeatedly refused to let the government take on powers to tell pension funds how they should invest a certain amount of savers’ money, with the aim of encouraging economic growth in the UK.
Following ministerial amendments on Tuesday intended to assuage peers’ concerns, the House of Lords has accepted a final draft of the pension schemes bill.
The portion of funds would be limited to 10%, by value, of all assets of the scheme in main default reserves, or 5% of assets to be held in UK-specific description.
Pensions minister Torsten Bell said earlier in the Commons that the government had tweaked the power since peers last reviewed it.
He proposed “a new requirement on regulators, in this case, the Pensions Regulator and the Financial Conduct Authority, to make an assessment of barriers” to pension funds investing their money into private assets.
The government would also be unable to use the power before 2028 and it would be repealed in full by 2035.
He pointed to the government’s pensions review, which found the defined contribution pensions market “is operating with an excessively narrow focus on cost”.
The probe found that “the excessively narrow focus can be detrimental to saver outcomes”.
Bell told the Commons: “That is where the reserve power comes from – it exists because the review found and the industry itself has told us that competitive pressure focused on cost minimisation is the single biggest barrier to diversifying in savers’ long-term interest”.
The changes were accepted by peers.
Liberal Democrat peer Lady Bowles of Berkhamsted told the Lords that she was “still no fan of mandation, but I think we have got it now suitably under control”, saying there were now “reasonable guardrails” in place.
Shadow minister Viscount Younger of Leckie said: “The government have consistently argued that mandation is necessary to address a collective action problem, they will now need to substantiate that claim with robust independent evidence, and for the secretary of state to have regard to this assessment before they make regulations.”
Lady Sherlock, the work and pensions minister, said the bill would “help reshape the pensions landscape” and help savers get a better return.
Updated
Reed says government won't impose rent freeze, after Reeves suggests option not ruled out
On Monday Kiran Stacey revealed that the Treasury is considering imposing a one-year rent freeze on private sector homes as part of its response to the economic shock caused by the Iran war.
Yesterday the government’s response was varied; while Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, would not rule out the idea when she was asked about it, No 10 said it had “no plans” to do this – a standard government formula which can mean something will never happen, or that it’s an option being considered but government is not yet willing to discuss it.
Today the government has come out with a third position on the story; Steve Reed, the housing secretary, flatly ruled out the proposal.
Asked if the government was floating the idea to appeal to potential Green voters, Reed replied: “No. I think I’ve just been crystal clear, we’re not doing it.”
Reed rejects ambassador's claim Starmer might be forced out after May elections, saying 'he's not Mystic Meg'
In his interview with Times Radio this morning, Steve Reed, the housing secretary, said the UK ambassador to Washington, Christian Turner, was wrong to suggest in a private conversation that Keir Starmer may lose his job after the May elections.
Asked about the comment, Reed said:
[Turner] was speaking to a group of school kids. I don’t know whether he meant it seriously, lightheartedly, but whatever it is, it’s not going to happen. He’s not Mystic Meg. We saw in the vote last night, our parliamentary Labour party, our MPs are fully behind our prime minister.
But Reed said he did not think there was a need for Turner to apologise. Asked about this, Reed said:
I don’t think people have to apologise for every single comment that they make. No.
My colleague Jessica Elgot posted this on Bluesky last night about Darren Jones’s closing speech in the privileges committee debate.
Keir Starmer had a lot to thank Darren Jones for today - he reminded his backbenches of their real enemies. Reminiscent of the Michael Gove speech at the no confidence vote called by Jeremy Corbyn, which brought his warring party (briefly) back together.
Here is an extract from what Jones said.
Regrettably – we see this again today, time after time – the opposition are just trying to expand their interpretation of the prime minister’s words in bad faith, because their previous claim that the prime minister must have known about Peter Mandelson’s clearance has fallen apart in front of their eyes, and now they are grasping at straws …
[Privileges committee] investigations cannot be done every week off the back of PMQs on an interpretation of the wording of the prime minister. Instead, they must be done on very significant cases that warrant the work of the privileges committee. That is why it is important to contrast the allegations and accusations of the opposition parties, as many Members of the House have done today, with the seriousness of the situation when Boris Johnson was referred to the privileges committee in the last parliament.
This is an important precedent. In those circumstances, Boris Johnson knowingly told this House that there were no parties in Downing Street during Covid lockdowns, only for it to emerge that he had personally been at five of them and received a police fine for attending them. That is the nature of lying to this House, which he was proven to have done in the work of the privileges committee. It is not about the interpretation of a question and answer at prime minister’s questions.
This all begs the question: if there is no substance to the allegations in the motion today, what is it that is driving the behaviour of opposition parties? That question goes to the very basis of the motion before us. I have to ask: what is it precisely about this Labour government giving rights and powers to workers, renters and the disadvantaged that they do not like? What is it about this Labour government standing against unearned wealth and people who use their privilege to extract value from the system, rather than adding to it, that they do not like? What is it about a Labour government raising taxes on private jets and non-doms to raise money for our state schools, our NHS and our police and to lift children out of poverty after years of neglect by the Conservative party that the opposition parties do not want to hear? We all know why – because they are on the side of the vested interests, and we are on the side of the British people.
You can read the full speech here.
Steve Reed dismisses Labour rebels as ‘usual suspects’, as Starmer prepares for final PMQs of 2024-26 session
Good morning. Originally Keir Starmer was hoping that there would not be a need for a PMQs today, but we have got one, and it will definitely be the last of the 2024-26 parliamentary session. It will be a chance for Starmer to reflect on all the legislation passed.
There is some relief that the government won the vote on Kemi Badenoch’s call for Starmer to be referred to the privileges committee with ease. Here is our overnight story by Pippa Crerar, Ben Quinn and Jessica Elgot.
Labour MPs were also cheered by Darren Jones’ speech winding up the debate, of which more later.
Some 53 Labour MPs did not take part in the division last night – some because they were authorised to be away, others because they were abstaining deliberately because they did not want to vote against the motion – but only 15 voted with Badenoch. Here is the list.
At the start of this session of parliament, Starmer removed the whip from seven Labour MPs who voted for an SNP amendment to the king’s speech motion calling for the two-child benefit benefits cap to be abolished. Subsequently this was seen as an overreaction (not least because abolishing the cap later became government policy), and in an interview this morning Steve Reed, the housing secretary, played down the prospect of last night’s 15 rebels having the whip withdrawn. Asked if they should lose the whip, he told Times Radio:
There was a handful of usual suspects who did what they tend to do. I’m not in charge of discipline, I’m not too bothered about them to be honest.
And he told Sky News:
You’ve got a handful of usual suspects that will repeatedly vote against the government. They’re not going to distract us.
You know, we’ve got the renters’ rights reforms coming in this Friday, which gives renters, people who rent their home, the biggest increase in protections and rights that we’ve had for a generation.
That is what voters want us to focus on, not a handful of people that go off and don’t play the team game with the rest of us.
Ninety nine percent of us are united with the prime minister so that we can focus on the issues that matter.
Reed’s maths is a bit off; the 15 rebels amount to about 4% of the PLP, not 1%. But you get the point.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.
1.15pm: Parliament prorogues with a ceremony in the House of Lords.
2pm: Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, holds a press conference on plans to “keep Trump, Musk and Putin out of our politics”.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), 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.bsky.social. 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
