MPs have voted to overturn all the key Lords amendments to the Welfare Reform Bill, with eight Liberal Democrats rebelling over government plans to remove some benefits from cancer patients and severely disabled people.
Three amendments on Employment Support Allowance (ESA) were rejected by MPs in line with the government's majority in the Commons, with Labour opposing the restrictions for ESA on disabled people. Later MPs overturned a further Lords amendment to the government's controversial benefit cap, which the Lords have revised to make child support allowance exempt.
The vote was significant because it was the first time Labour actually gave an indication in the Commons on its current view on the benefit cap - they have been unwilling to comment on it despite taunts from David Cameron about where they actually stand.
The final vote at 7:45pm was comfortably won by 318 - 257, in line with similar majorities for the government. The Welfare Reform Bill will now return to the Lords at an unknown date, possibly on the 15th of Febuary when the Commons will be in recess.
The government has indicated that if the Lords fail to back down, it may invoke "financial privilege" on the Bill, meaning that the Lords can't debate it any further because it has been classified as a "money" Bill. Labour has indicated it will seek legal advice on whether the government can do this.
Earlier Chris Grayling challenged Ed Miliband to support the government as they sought to overturn the Lords changes to the Bill, including on a £26,000 per-year benefit cap and charging single parents to use the Child Support Agency.
The government is adamant it will seek to overturn the amendments made by peers - although IDS has revealed one concession, a nine month transitional period for families affected by the benefit cap.
"Ed Miliband claims Labour support the government's cap on benefits. But last week he tried to wreck it in the Lords," the employment minister said. "So if he is serious about tackling the something for nothing culture, he will u-turn on his decision last week and back the Government's cap on benefits in full."
Tuesday saw the government's seventh Lords defeat on the Welfare Reform Bill, this time over the amount paid to children who are receiving the lower rate of Disability Allowance (DLA). However the government is expected to use financial privilege on some amendments to get them through parliament.
Shadow work and pensions secretary Liam Byrne has said while Labour supports the benefits cap, it should be changed depending on where people live.
"We think there should be an independent commission to take the politics out of this, and that there should be different levels in London to the rest of the country. We think you should take into account different levels of housing benefits. This isn't about a difference of wages. We have had a localised part of the welfare system for nearly 70 years now that hinges on housing benefits."
A Labour source said while the party supported bringing down the cost of benefits to the taxpayer, "the point of opposition is to oppose."
If there's no agreement, the government can choose to invoke the Parliament Act to over-ride the Lords and pass the Welfare Reform Bill into law. But the technicalities of this mean it can only be done in the next session of parliament - that's after the Queen's Speech expected in May.
The Lords amendments overturned on Wednesday in full:
- Amendment to water down the so-called "Bedroom Tax" which would reduce housing benefit payments for families living in council homes with at least one spare bedroom. Lords majority 68.
- Amendment to reverse an attempt to take Employment Support Allowance away from young disabled people - something peers say would only save £10m but which currently guarantees they can live independent lives. Lords Majority 44
- Amendment to raise to 24 months the proposed 12-month limit on claiming contributory ESA. Lords majority 48.
- Amendment to exempt cancer patients from the contributory ESA limits. Lords majority 56.
- Housing benefit, a Bishop's amendment which excludes child benefit from the £26,000 household benefit cap. This was an amendment backed by Labour after it lost its own motion to prevent people at risk of being made homeless being assessed by the cap. Labour were accused of flip-flopping over the benefit cap after this vote. Lords majority 15
- Last but not least, there was the massive defeat for the government on dropping the proposal to charge single parents for using the Child Support Agency. Attempting to overturn this amendment would be the most controversial for the government given the size of the defeat. Lords majority 142.
Highlights from today's debate below:
Where has everyone gone? Changes on the last vote.
There are more to come....
Has he been doing interviews off the back of his New Statesman essay?
Looking very convivial.
This would be when the Commons is in recess, which is not that odd. Certainly no date has been set, this is just what HuffPost was told by a peer this evening.
In the meantime Labour announced that they would take legal advice if the government attempted to exert "financial privilege" on some of the amendments being overturned today.
Financial privilege means the Lords may not vote on legislation, because by law only the Commons is required to pass money laws.
This already has the Lords fuming because it would be unusual for welfare laws to be considered financial - but that's the game that's being played out now.
The government has reiterated that it thinks it has privilege over the Lords on these matters , but it's going to overturn them now anyway, the threat being that if the Lords don't back down then the Commons will assert supremacy because it's on financial matters.
Tory minister Maria Miller Is leading on these amendments, and claims that they are increasing support and money for disabled kids overall.
So that's the first vote over, by slightly larger margins than the ESA votes. The assumption must be that the Lib Dems didn't rebel on this.
Labour are tight-lipped about the benefit cap as we saw at PMQs today. But they have issued a statement on cancer patients just now:
Liam Byrne MP, Labour’s Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, responding the welfare debate in the House of Commons, said: “This Government is using every trick in the book to force through plans to snatch support from cancer patients and children with disabilities. “We know the Government fears its ill-fitting benefit cap could end up costing more than it saves, but they have blocked a vote on Labour’s local cap today and they want to stop the Lords looking at it either.
“They don’t want a debate on these issues because they are losing the argument. They should listen to Labour’s plans for a local benefit cap and they should drop their proposals to kick away support from some of the most vulnerable people in society.”
Here come the first in a series of votes on the benefit cap. Result in 10 minutes.
He's accusing Labour of dancing around the issue on the benefit cap. Will Labour be opposing these next set of attempts to overturn Lords amendments, despite the concession offered by Iain Duncan Smith for a nine month transition period?
Chris Grayling says the vote will be a chance for Labour to show its true colours on the benefit cap once and for all.
Huffpost UK also met some guys who are campaigning against the changes to DLA - moving people over to Employment Support Allowance... and their views on how the coalition is treating people with disabilities..
While the MPs continue to debate the Lords amendments, Huffpost UK has been out to Central Lobby - we met one campaigner who's calling on the Lords to hold firm on the charges to use the Child Support Agency:
And that's it for voting for a while. We're now on to the benefits cap amendments. This will be discussed for about two hours.
- Andrew George
- Mike Hancock
- John Leech
- Greg Mulholland
- Alan Reid
- Bob Russell
- Adrian Sanders
- Ian Swales
....and here comes a division for the third vote.
|@ Old_Holborn : I do suggest you follow the #wrb hashtag. Positively SEETHING with Leftist "entitlement" demanding YOU work harder so they don't have to.|
|@ SophieBridger : Pleased about the LDs who supported the Lords amendments. Deeply disappointed that it wasn't more #wrb|
|@ LadyBasildon : Metcalfe aide in Twitter storm http://t.co/fxsAgDyE Tory cllr describing disabled protestors as 'unwashed' is wrong whatever his reason #wrb|
Suggests an active campaign against the votes which are going through on the nod this afternoon. Many seem disgusted with MPs for overturning the amendments, very few seem to want to publicly support the government online.
|@ KevinBrennanMP : Just voted on WRB amendment - no sign of any Lib Dems with us|
A few amendments are upheld without complaint, this another vote on ESA.
Commons rejects the Lords amendments to Employment Support Allowance by 324 - 265
Clearing the lobbies.
Tories are getting increasingly angry with Ian Lavery, who has accused them of relishing cuts in welfare.
On support for cancer patients being cut, Chris Grayling has managed an intervention, saying:
"Somebody who is diagnosed with cancer will spend an extended period in a support group. They will not lose benefits."
|@ IsabelHardman : Govt is going to ask to use financial privilege on amendments of welfare reform bill 15,17,18,23|
Claims that the allegations of "same old Tories" have been proved correct, particularly after hearing David Nuttall speak previously.
He accuses the government of "the most heinous acts upon the most vulnerable" and accuses Tory MPs of "relishing the fact that benefits are being cut".
Supports the government on the Universal Credit, because it will be less complicated than the current system.
This Parliament's most rebellious MP, according to most measures. But he won't be rebelling today and supports the government's version of the Welfare Reform Bill.
"We have to have rules of policy of the insurance system," he says. "hard working families in my constituency... will ask themselves why should their taxes to towards paying benefits to people who have far more savings than them?"
Claims that if the Lib Dems had a free vote they'd be supporting the Lords amendments. Lib Dems in the chamber are quiet. Mind you there is only about six of them.
Winnick says the amendments are a direct contradiction of what the PM said previously about fairness in society.