Upcoming changes to benefits

There is much in what you say re new MPs. Of the 35 who signed the pro-Starmer letter, Phillipson (she of the purple hair!) was the most well-known. NOT the party heavy-hitters to say the least. One MP later asked for her name to be removed too!

I don't understand why The Times is free to access online this weekend when it is not normally free to access.

Something fishy going on.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/mar/09/more-benefit-cuts-would-risk-turning-drops-of-dissent-in-labours-ranks-into-a-flood

Worth reading if you haven't already. The message, I think, is that we should not get disheartened - the appearance of quiet in the next few days does not mean this has all been agreed. Possibly a long haul ahead though.

I’m wondering if labour leaked the story to the times to see what the reaction would be . This way they can make changes and deny the report was ever true. If they are bringing those changes in regardless why not just tell their back benchers . I just watched an interview with an MP called Emma ( can’t remember last name). She said she didn’t know about the changes suggested in the times but if they were true she couldn’t agree to them . Labour are disgusting , leaving us worrying so they can test the waters imo

'Loyalty' to Starmer will evaporate the minute the polls tank. Let's not lose heart, he's the Prime Minister now but he won't be forever. Johnson won a landslide for the other lot after they'd been in for almost a decade. They booted him out two and a half years later. I suspect loyalty to 'Sir Keir' within the party is pretty shallow. There's no doubt Streeting and Rayner would both like his job. They have (reportedly) both expressed unease about this.

I suspect Rachel's knowledge of the average Labour voter's concerns is about as great as her grasp of economics.

Struggling to post the screenshot but the important final paragraph is below. It also suggests to me that MPs opposed think it isn't going to happen immediately.

Of course, the longer a government delays those cuts, the closer the bath is to overflowing and the less likely it is that those cuts will happen at all. Some of the MPs who are particularly opposed to the cuts also happen to be very annoyed with Starmer and Reeves, and quite hopeful that they may be able to remove the former. They won’t speak out because they are biding their time until that bath does overflow and there is a flood of resentment in the wider Labour party that they can then take advantage of. So don’t be deceived if the party seems relatively peaceful and united over the next few months. The tap is still dripping.

oh wow I hope that’s true . How long could this take especially if it went to court ? Would court delay any changes ? Thank you this has given me a bit of hope .

@Moorgater when I watched PM Questions on Wednesday, I think it was Lucy Powell who was sat on Angela Rayners' right hand side and I thought her face looked peed off/not quite thunderous but could have been, all when Starmer was talking.

I don’t think they’ve thought this through. One minute I read they’re reducing lcwra and increasing the basic rate. Then there’re stopping lcwra and we all need to engage . So would that mean we’d get more money again in the basic job seekers group. Then it would be constant sanctions as we can’t work . It can’t possibly be lawful to leave anyone without funds especially sick and disabled people. Then of course if they remove pip from so many ppl local councils will have to look after them as their carers are forced to work . Nothing makes sense to me but I think that’s because what msm states will happen doesn’t make sense.