Mailwatch(ed) Forum

This Welfare Bill is turning out to be a right fiasco. Was it really worth it? Changes to PIP kicked into the grass, hardly any savings made, just makes Starmer look stubborn and stupid. Should've killed the bill and went back to the drawing board.

Yeah, should have done much more gradual reforms, like the Blair Government did with job seekers.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 6:38 pm Yeah, should have done much more gradual reforms, like the Blair Government did with job seekers.

True but at least the worst have been junked.

The Welfare Reform Bill passed Second Reading (the “rebel” reasoned amendment was easily defeated) with a government majority of 75. There seem to have been quite a large number of abstentions.

All the people who should be running the government are cutting hair, driving cabs and posting on Bluesky.

There's not a low priority placed on policy. There's loads of it, lots of it looks pretty good.

Here's more from Bush. Not sure what he's objecting to exactly here. Sure, some obligations have been placed on business, but business taxation hasn't risen much. That's kind of what I'd expect from a Labour Government, and there's the quid pro quo of the greater infrastructure investment and planning reform, which business is happy with.

They did the non-doc tax reform, that's pretty major. So is the anti-avoidance stuff. How does he know there's near zero interest in other reforms? You'd not expect it all to go in the first finance bill. And true, nationalisation doesn't necessarily work, but I reckon Peter Hendy isn't sat back there assuming it will.

Ah, the sage of Bluesky has spoken.

How No 10 went from bullish to badly damaged as rebels forced further welfare bill concessions
Tumultuous 24 hours capped by last-minute welfare bill concessions could define rest of Starmer’s time in No 10

"Could define", says paper who are going to play their full role in defining it like this. Surprised they didn't use a sly passive there for added value.

I take it this is the Grauniad?

Yes. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... oncessions

Lucky guess.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 8:17 pm Here's more from Bush. Not sure what he's objecting to exactly here. Sure, some obligations have been placed on business, but business taxation hasn't risen much. That's kind of what I'd expect from a Labour Government, and there's the quid pro quo of the greater infrastructure investment and planning reform, which business is happy with.

They did the non-doc tax reform, that's pretty major. So is the anti-avoidance stuff. How does he know there's near zero interest in other reforms? You'd not expect it all to go in the first finance bill. And true, nationalisation doesn't necessarily work, but I reckon Peter Hendy isn't sat back there assuming it will.

I believe it is NI raises and raising the minimum wage, plus employment law.