Labour rebellion clouds welfare bill win despite concessions

3 hours ago Share Save Kate Whannel & Brian Wheeler Political reporter Share Save

Watch: 'It's been a bumpy time tonight, but we go forward'

The government has won a vote on its benefits bill by 75 votes, but only after offering last-minute concessions to Labour rebels. Ministers had already watered down their plans once by reversing some cuts to universal credit and protecting current claimants of personal independence payment (Pip) from stricter eligibility rules. However, some Labour MPs were still concerned the new criteria for claiming Pip would come into force before the recommendations of a review could be implemented. Fearing a humiliating defeat, the government announced a further U-turn, saying it would not change Pip rules until it had time to consider the review's conclusions.

The 11th hour changes leave the government's Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill gutted of its most significant measures. The move undermines Sir Keir's authority, which has been called into question by a series of U-turns recently, and that of Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall. It also puts pressure on Chancellor Rachel Reeves' spending plans, as potential savings of around £5bn will now be delayed or lost entirely. Helen Miller, incoming director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, said the figures would "intensify the speculation over the summer about which taxes may rise and by how much". She said it raised questions about the government's credibility adding: "It doesn't bode well for those hoping this government will grasp the nettle and address the deeper, structural challenges facing the UK public finances." Speaking after the vote, Kendall said: "I wish we had got to this point in a different way." She said there were "lessons to learn from the process" but defended the bill arguing it put in place "really important reforms" to help those who can, back into work. She insisted Labour MPs were "100% behind the prime minister".

Following a tumultuous few hours in Parliament, MPs voted by 335 votes to 260 to give the bill their initial approval. The result saw the government's working majority cut from 165 to 75. MPs will continue to scrutinise the bill when it returns to the House of Commons on Wednesday 9 July. Ministers had hoped changes made last week had convinced wavering rebels to back the bill, but during the debate many still expressed concerns. Less than two hours before the final vote, disability minister Sir Stephen Timms told MPs the government was making further compromises, by removing sections of the bill which would have introduced new Pip eligibility rules. "We will move straight on to the wider review and only make changes to Pip eligibility activity and descriptors following that review," he told MPs. Several MPs expressed anger and frustration at the last-minute changes. Labour MP Paula Barker said: "Whilst grateful for the concessions, this has further laid bare the incoherent and shambolic nature of this process - it is the most unedifying spectacle that I have ever seen." Labour's Mary Kelly Foy told MPs: "I popped out for a banana earlier on and, when I came back in, things had changed again. So I'm even more unclear on what I'm voting on." After the vote had taken place, Labour's Ian Lavery told the BBC: "This is an absolute shambles. I've never seen anything like it." Both the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives criticised the process and said the bill should be pulled entirely.

Watch: Moment Labour wins crucial welfare reform vote

Slow-motion humiliation for Starmer as he loses control of Commons

But not only did swathes of his own MPs desert him, Downing Street was insufficiently nimble to first clock the breadth and depth of their anger and then realise quickly enough the scale of what would be necessary to deal with it.

The astonishing thing about this row is Sir Keir Starmer has a mandate and a majority.

But the parallel is this: a government transparently not in control of events, shoved around humiliatingly by parliament.

It is extraordinary to say that because the parallel seems absurd: those moments in recent years happened to prime ministers without their own mandate or much of a majority or when engulfed in scandal.

Or even the bumpy moments for Boris Johnson and Liz Truss.

The extraordinary thing about this is it felt, albeit perhaps just fleetingly, like the fraught and chaotic parliamentary rows about Brexit.

And when the government sought to reassure its MPs by presenting details to the Commons on Monday, it only served to make things worse for them - sowing uncertainty among wavering MPs about the specifics of the concessions.

Embarrassing, yes, and awkward too, but something they could have probably lived with. But would-be rebels kept telling us the numbers were nudging up.

But here is the thing – the government hoped they had done enough. It quickly became apparent there was a stubborn and sticky group of perhaps about 50 Labour MPs who still would not support the prime minister.

The incidental details tell a story at moments like this and the timing of that opening climbdown pointed to the speed with which it had been cobbled together.

Firstly, there was massive U-turn number one, completed the wrong side of midnight in the early hours of last Friday.

By Monday night, those familiar with the whipping spreadsheet were warning that the situation was "touch and go".

It was clear from the furrowed brows of senior Labour figures by the middle of Tuesday that there was much more anxiety at the top of government than the public numbers would have suggested.

And yet Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall returned to the Commons and repeated what the government was still intending to do – change the eligibility criteria for the Personal Independence Payment (Pip) in November of next year.

By mid-afternoon, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner was frantically hitting the phones trying to persuade Labour MPs.

Suddenly, and again, they were worried about losing.

Word then reached Downing Street the numbers might be closer to 75 or 80 rebels – getting very close to the number that would defeat the bill.

The prime minister had no option. Yet another U turn was sanctioned, leaving his plans appearing threadbare, shorn of their central pillars of just a week ago.

And so up stepped the Work and Pensions Minister, Sir Stephen Timms, to announce another climbdown.

But that decision to concede was met with fury by would-be rebels, many of those who saw the whole thing as a shambles and those Labour MPs who had loyally backed the various changes throughout and so had been asked to endorse three different positions in less than a week.

One, referring to senior Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier who had campaigned for the first climbdown, told the BBC:

"Meg better own any autumn tax rises and go out and sell them on the airwaves every day until the end of the parliament. She marched them all up to the top of the hill and couldn't bring them down again."

Other MPs were more pithy.

"Jokers" said one, referring both to the government and the rebels.

"Nightmare" was another's assessment of the situation.

Some government officials are more openly contemptuous of Labour MPs than ever.

One, referring to the rebels who were first elected in 2024, said: "What did they think the job was? They all think they're JFK because they delivered some leaflets while Morgan [McSweeney] won them the election."

The implications are head-spinning.

Plenty now believe tax rises in this autumn's budget are inevitable.

Whether Rachel Reeves will still be chancellor to deliver it is being questioned by Labour figures at all levels.

Some suggest that Kendall ought to resign without delay. She has said she wants to carry on.

One senior government source argued that though the government had been preparing to lift the two-child benefit cap in the autumn, this would no longer be possible.

Meanwhile some at the heart of government are still reeling from a string of interviews given by the prime minister to mark his first anniversary in Downing Street on Friday, taken by some senior figures as a repudiation of the approach he has taken - and therefore of his advisers.

One senior source said: "The atmosphere in there [No 10] is appallingly bad", accusing the prime minister of "dumping on people who are a staunch part of the team".

They added: "A lot of it comes back to the question of what does Keir think - about policy and about personnel. It's the question everyone asks all the time because nobody knows."

Sir Keir sought to address the personnel element at cabinet on Tuesday, saying he had full confidence in Mr McSweeney, his chief of staff, and that Labour would not have won the general election without him.

All this leaves the prime minister and those around him humbled, bruised, reflective, pensive. Weakened.

When the economy is flat, politics can often be angry, impatient.

The international backdrop turbulent, the domestic bleak.

The 2020s are no easy time to lead.

But Sir Keir will know he has to demonstrably get a grip and quickly, after a deeply damaging episode for him.

'They took shrapnel from my heart' – the magnets saving lives in Ukraine

2 hours ago Share Save Anastasiya Gribanova BBC Ukrainian Service, Kyiv Scarlett Barter BBC World Service Share Save

Kevin McGregor / BBC Ukrainian serviceman Serhiy Melnyk holds the piece of shrapnel that was once lodged in his heart

From his pocket, Serhiy Melnyk pulls out a small rusty shard, wrapped neatly in paper. He holds it up. "It grazed my kidney, pierced my lung, and my heart," says the Ukrainian serviceman quietly. Traces of dried blood are still visible on the shrapnel from a Russian drone that became lodged in his heart while he was fighting in eastern Ukraine. "I didn't even realise what it was at first — I thought I was just short of breath under my body armour," he says. "They had to extract shrapnel out of my heart." With the rise of drone warfare in Ukraine, these injuries are becoming more common. Drones often carry weapons and materials which fragment and cause more complex shrapnel wounds. According to Ukrainian military medics, shrapnel wounds now make up to 80% of battlefield trauma. Untreated, Serhiy's injury would have been fatal. "The fragment was as sharp as a blade. Doctors said it was a large piece, and that I was lucky to survive," he says reflectively. But it wasn't just luck that saved him, it was a new piece of medical technology. A magnetic extractor.

Kevin McGregor / BBC Serhiy Maksymenko's team removed the shrapnel from Serhiy's heart

'I make a small incision and insert the magnet'

Cardiovascular surgeon Serhiy Maksymenko shows footage of the metal fragment trapped in Serhiy's beating heart before it is delicately removed by a thin magnet-tipped device. "You don't have to make large cuts in the heart," explains Dr Maksymenko. "I just make a small incision, insert the magnet, and it pulls the shrapnel out." In just one year, Doctor Maksymenko's team has performed over 70 successful heart operations with the device, which has changed the face of front-line medicine in Ukraine. The development of these extractors came after front-line medics highlighted the urgent need for a safe, fast, minimally invasive way to remove shrapnel. Oleh Bykov - who used to work as a lawyer - drove this development. Since 2014 he has been supporting the army as a volunteer. He met medics on the front line and from his conversations the magnetic extractors were created. The concept isn't new. Magnets were used for removing metal from wounds as far back as the Crimean War in the 1850s. But Oleh's team modernised the approach, creating flexible models for abdominal surgery, micro-extractors for delicate work, and high-strength tools for bones. Operations have become more precise and less invasive. The magnet can be run along the surface of a wound to draw fragments out. Surgeons then make a small incision and the piece is removed. Holding a slim pen-shaped tool, Oleh demonstrates its power by lifting a sledgehammer with the magnetic tip.

Kevin McGregor / BBC The magnets are powerful enough to lift a sledgehammer

His work has been commended by other war medics including David Nott, a veteran of war zones around the world. "In war, things get developed which would never have been thought of in civilian life," he says. Fragmentation wounds have increased due to the changing face of war, and because they take a long time to find he believes this device could be a game changer. He says looking for shrapnel in patients is like "looking for a needle in a haystack"- it is not always successful and delays treatment of other casualties. Searching for fragments manually can be dangerous and requires bigger incisions that can cause more bleeding – "so to be able just to simply find them using a magnet is ingenious."

Dnipro cardiac center The magnetic extractor that removed the shrapnel from Serhiy's heart

What began as a field tool has now been rolled out across Ukraine, with 3,000 units distributed to hospitals and front-line medics, like Andriy Alban who says he has come to rely on the device. He often works while under fire, in trenches or makeshift outdoor clinics, and sometimes without local anaesthetic. "My job is to save lives - bandage wounds and get soldiers evacuated," he says. There has been no official certification of the magnetic extractor. The Ukrainian Health Ministry says medical devices must comply fully with technical regulations. However, in exceptional cases, such as martial law or a state of emergency, the use of uncertified devices is allowed to meet the needs of the military and security forces. At the height of war, there's no time for red tape, mastermind Oleh explains. "These devices save lives. If someone thinks my actions are a crime, I'll take responsibility. I'm even prepared to go to jail if it comes to that. But then all the doctors who use these devices should be incarcerated too," he adds half jokingly. David Nott agrees that certification is not a top priority for now and believes the device could prove helpful in other war zones such as Gaza. "In war, it's not really necessary. You only do the things which are important to save lives." Back in Lviv, Serhiy's wife Yulia is just grateful her husband survived his injury. "I just want to praise those people who invented this extractor," she says tearfully. "Thanks to them, my husband is alive."

The countdown is on for Women's Euro 2025.

Will Sarina Wiegman's side defend the title they won in 2022? Will Wales cause an upset as they make their debut in a major tournament?

These are just two questions avid fans will have as the top European teams prepare for the finals in Switzerland.

With the draw made and each team's potential route to glory established, BBC Sport provides the lowdown on all the key details for Women's Euro 2025.

Even in the past week, away from Leeds, West Indies flirted with pulling off something special against the Aussies in Barbados, and in Zimbabwe 19-year-old Lhuan-dre Pretorius became the youngest man to make a hundred for South Africa. Keep an eye on him, a megastar of the future.

More broadly, runs are being scored faster, wickets taken more regularly, there are more close matches and fewer draws than ever before.

The run-rate across all Test cricket in the past three years has been 3.60, the highest of any three-year period. Over the same time, less than 10% of Tests were drawn, down from more than 20% across the previous 20 years and more than 40% historically.

It is a disregard for draws that marks England's Bazballers out as innovators.

It would be hyperbole to say they have saved Test cricket, still not unreasonable to say they have altered the perspective on the way it could be played - 37 Tests and counting since Ben Stokes and Brendon McCullum united, only one soggy draw among them.

Draws can be thrilling - some wonderful Tests have been drawn - but by being so bullish about not considering a stalemate as a possibility, this England team have added a thrilling aspect to the five-day narrative.

For those watching, it leaves the wonder of how England will attempt to force a result, regardless of the situation. For opponents, it leaves the fear of always being in danger, the confusion of what it will take to beat Stokes' team. For England, it gives the clarity of thought to attempt and comfortably complete a run chase like the one in Leeds, removing the seed of doubt sewn by the safety net of a draw.

As an opening chapter of a 10-part story, comprising this India series and the Ashes against Australia this winter, Headingley was perfect, more than living up to the pre-match billing. There will have been plenty of other series with as much expectation as the two England are undertaking, though it is hard to remember a time when Test cricket has been in such sharp focus for a period of time as prolonged as the next seven months.

England were favourites at Headingley and could, probably should, have lost. India paid the price for dropped catches, a crucial Harry Brook wicket off a no-ball and a tail that refused to wag.

As a result, the tourists are in a muddle at Edgbaston. Do they play another one of their Jasprit Bumrah chips, leaving only one for the rest of the series? Will they find a place for magician wrist-spinner Kuldeep Yadav and simultaneously boost their lower-order batting?

England are settled, with the prospect of Jofra Archer returning for the third Test next week at Lord's, the ground where he made his electrifying debut six years ago. Steve Smith and all that.

It would be good for the series if India won this week. Level at 1-1 is all to play for, 2-0 down is as good as over. The visitors will have to battle history - they have never won in eight visits to Edgbaston spanning 58 years.

Another classic incoming?