🔧 Welfare Reform

• Current State of Welfare System: The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall, criticized the welfare system inherited from the Conservatives as failing those it should help and holding back the country. One in ten working-age people claims a sickness or disability benefit, and nearly 1 million young people are not in education, employment, or training.

• Rising Costs and Claims: The number of people claiming personal independence payments (PIP) is expected to double this decade from 2 million to 4.3 million, driven by claims among young people and those with mental health conditions. The cost of working-age sickness and disability benefits has risen by £20 billion since the pandemic and is set to increase further.

• Government’s Plan for Change: The new government aims to get more people into good work through a £26 billion investment in the NHS to reduce waiting lists, landmark employment rights legislation, increases in the national living wage, and creating jobs in clean energy and through a modern industrial strategy.

• Pathways to Work Green Paper: The government plans to introduce major reforms to the employment support system with a £240 million “Get Britain Working” plan. The Pathways to Work Green Paper outlines actions to create a proactive, pro-work system for those who can work while protecting those who cannot.

• Focus on Prevention and Early Intervention: The government aims to shift towards prevention and early intervention to help people stay in work. Plans include providing statutory sick pay to low-paid workers, more rights to flexible working, and trialing new approaches like referring people to employment advisers.

• Reform of Contributory Benefits: The Green Paper proposes merging contributions-based jobseeker’s allowance and employment support allowance into a new time-limited unemployment insurance, without the need for individuals to prove they cannot work.

• Restoring Trust and Fairness: The work capability assessment will be scrapped in 2028 due to its inefficiencies and stress on claimants. Extra financial support in universal credit will be based solely on PIP assessments, and a “right to try” legislation will ensure that trying work does not lead to benefit reassessment.

• Rebalancing Universal Credit: The government will adjust universal credit payments to tackle perverse financial incentives that push people into welfare dependency by reducing the health top-up for new claimants and increasing the standard allowance.

• Reassessments and Safeguarding: The government plans to increase the number of reassessments, make them more face-to-face, and record them to ensure proper evaluation. Those with the most severe disabilities will not be reassessed.

• Disability Benefits Reform: The government will not implement Tory proposals like vouchers or means-testing for PIP. Instead, from November 2026, people will need to score a minimum of four points in at least one activity to qualify for the daily living element of PIP.

• Investment in Employment Support: The government will invest an additional £1 billion a year to guarantee high-quality, tailored support for sick and disabled people who can work. There will also be an expectation to engage for those on the UC health top-up, with support conversations about their goals and aspirations.

• Youth Employment: The government will delay access to the health top-up in universal credit until age 22, reinvesting savings into work support and training opportunities for young people to ensure they are either earning or learning.

• Opposition Response: The Conservative shadow Secretary of State, Helen Whately, agreed that the welfare bill is too high but criticized the Labour government for not having a plan and for delaying action. She questioned the effectiveness of the proposed reforms.

• Government’s Rebuttal: Liz Kendall responded by emphasizing that the Conservative party failed to address these issues, and Labour is taking decisive action to transform lives and ensure the social security system lasts for future generations.

• Committee and Opposition Views: Various MPs, including the Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee and members from opposition parties, raised concerns about the impact of the reforms on disabled people, the need for consultation, and the sustainability of the proposed changes.

The session on Welfare Reform displays a moderate level of disagreement, warranting a rating of 3 out of 5. This assessment is based on the following observations and examples from the transcript:

1. Criticism of Previous Government Policies: There is substantial disagreement between the current Government’s approach and the policies of the previous Conservative Government. The Secretary of State, Liz Kendall, consistently criticizes the Conservative’s handling of the welfare system, labeling it as a ‘broken’ system that has failed the people it was meant to help. This is evident in her statement:
   • “The social security system that we inherited from the Conservatives is failing the very people that it is supposed to help and is holding our country back.”
2. Opposition’s Response and Critique: Helen Whately from the opposition party directly challenges the credibility and originality of the current Government’s proposals. She argues that the current Government has essentially reannounced policies that were already in place or under consideration by the Conservatives. For example:
   • “Her big idea seems to be to delay that until 2028. Merging new-style jobseeker’s allowance and employment and support allowance into a new time-limited higher rate is a proposal that we worked up in government.”
3. Debate on Proposed Changes: There is notable disagreement on the specifics of the welfare reform, particularly around the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) changes. Members from different parties and independent MPs express concerns about the potential negative impact on the most vulnerable individuals. For instance, Jeremy Corbyn questions the premise of the reforms being predicated on saving £5 billion at the expense of disabled people:
   • “This whole statement is predicated on saving £5 billion at the expense of people with disabilities in our society.”
4. Focus on Implementation and Impact: Further disagreements arise concerning the implementation and expected outcomes of the reforms. Questions about the feasibility, timeline, and the net savings expected from the reforms are challenged by various MPs, as seen in Helen Whately’s inquiry:
   • “How many people will be helped back into work and by when?”
5. Personal and Constituent Concerns: Many MPs voiced concerns about their constituents’ reactions to the proposed reforms, particularly regarding the potential reduction in benefits. This reflects differing views on the immediate human impact of the reforms versus their long-term economic benefits. For instance, Shockat Adam raises the issue of local implications:
   • “My inbox—like those of everybody else here, I am certain—is full of emails from petrified disabled constituents.”
6. Broader Policy Disagreements: The debate extends beyond the welfare reforms to broader policy implications, including suggestions for alternative methods of raising revenue, such as wealth taxes, as highlighted by Ian Byrne:
   • “Does the Secretary of State really believe that it is fair to balance the books on the backs of disabled people and the poor, rather than introducing a wealth tax on the super-rich?”

Overall, the disagreements are substantial and multifaceted, ranging from the critique of previous policies, the originality and impact of new proposals, to broader policy debates. However, the session does not degenerate into severe personal attacks or extreme partisan skirmishes, leading to the moderate rating of 3.