Rachel Reeves will “after all” be chancellor in six months’ time, a senior ally of Sir Keir Starmer has stated, regardless of final evening’s humiliating showdown over welfare cuts.
Pat McFadden, the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, admitted there could be a “price” to the federal government’s resolution to successfully neuter its welfare invoice, which was supposed to avoid wasting Ms Reeves round £5bn however now leaves her with an estimated £5.5bn black gap.
Chatting with Kamali Melbourne on Sky Information’ Breakfast Mr McFadden acknowledged it had been a “powerful” few weeks for the federal government because it confronted down its backbenchers over proposals to shake up the welfare system.
Politics latest: Tories go on the attack against Rachel Reeves
The prime minister’s watered-down Common Credit score and Private Impartial Fee Invoice, geared toward saving £5.5bn, was backed by a majority of 75 in a tense vote on Tuesday evening.
A complete of 49 Labour MPs voted in opposition to the invoice – the most important insurrection in a primary minister’s first 12 months in workplace since 47 MPs voted in opposition to Tony Blair’s Lone Dad or mum profit in 1997, based on Professor Phil Cowley from Queen Mary College.
Ms Reeves has borne loads of the criticism over the dealing with of the vote, with some MPs believing that her strict method to fiscal guidelines has meant she has approached the ballooning welfare invoice from the standpoint of making an attempt to make financial savings, somewhat than getting individuals into work.
Specialists have additionally warned that the welfare U-turn, on high of reversing the minimize to winter gasoline, signifies that tax rises within the autumn are extra probably.
Requested whether or not he believed Ms Reeves would nonetheless be in her job within the subsequent six months, Mr McFadden replied: “After all she is going to. She’s doing a superb job. We take these choices as a group. We stand as a group, and we go ahead as a group.”
The senior cupboard minister sought to downplay the chaotic scenes that unfolded within the Commons final evening, when the federal government pulled essentially the most controversial parts of the invoice, leaving MPs to vote on just one ingredient – reducing common credit score (UC) illness advantages for brand new claimants from £97 every week to £50 from 2026/7.
Govt makes last-minute concession on welfare invoice
Simply 90 minutes earlier than voting began on Tuesday night, disabilities minister Stephen Timms announced the last of a series of concessions made as dozens of Labour MPs spoke of their fears for disabled and sick individuals if the invoice was made legislation.
In a serious U-turn, he stated adjustments in eligibility for the private independence fee (PIP), the primary incapacity fee to assist pay for further prices incurred, wouldn’t happen till a assessment he’s finishing up into the profit is revealed in autumn 2026.
An amendment brought by Labour MP Rachael Maskell, which aimed to forestall the invoice progressing to the following stage, was defeated however 44 Labour MPs voted for it.
Conservative shadow chancellor Mel Stride referred to as the vote “farcical” and stated the federal government “ended up on this horrible scenario” as a result of they “rushed it”.
He warned the markets “can have seen that relating to taking harder choices about controlling and spending, this authorities has been discovered wanting”.
Learn extra:
Beth Rigby: I suspect things may only get worse for the PM
How did your MP vote on Labour’s welfare bill?
Beth Rigby: The PM’s choice – welfare v warfare
Mr McFadden argued it was not “fully a foul factor that Labour MPs really feel passionately about this situation” regardless of it inflicting essentially the most damaging insurrection of the prime minister’s management up to now.
Welfare vote ‘a blow to the prime minister’
“There is a lengthy historical past of Labour MPs feeling passionately about this situation. However the place we have to, ultimately, is the second studying of the invoice going by way of and the reforms to PIP, which had been essentially the most contentious a part of this taken ahead in slower time now, by way of a assessment led by my colleague Stephen Timms.”
He added: “There’s a monetary consequence to the choice – there isn’t any denying that.
“However that is additionally about altering incentives, getting a greater system, getting extra help for individuals, who’re in search of work.
“There are vital key parts of the welfare reform bundle that had been handed within the vote final evening that had been nonetheless worthwhile. And we are going to take that ahead.”
