AG百家乐在线官网

By Faye Brown, political reporter

Number 10 has made concessions on its welfare bill after crisis talks with Labour rebels.

Sir Keir Starmer will be hoping the changes are enough to avoid a Commons defeat when the measures are put to a vote on Tuesday - but several MPs have said they are still not satisfied.

Sky News looks at what was in the deal and whether it will be enough to win over critics.

Sir Keir Starmer has said he "deeply regrets" claiming the UK risked becoming an "island of strangers" in an immigration speech that drew comparisons to the language of Enoch Powell.

The prime minister said he had not been in the "best state" to give the news conference, in which he insisted on the need for tighter border controls, as he reeled from an alleged arson attack on his family home.

He said he had considered pulling out of the speech after the fire at the property in Kentish Town left him "really shaken up."

Starmer ended up going through with the conference as planned just hours after the blaze.

He warned Britain risked becoming "an island of strangers" without tougher immigration controls 鈥� rhetoric that sparked an immediate backlash and was denounced by critics, including within Labour ranks, as divisive.

At the time, Downing Street doubled down on the remarks and said Starmer "completely rejects" suggestions he had echoed the infamous "rivers of blood" speech.

This was blamed for inflaming racial tensions in the 1960s.

But in an interview for the Observer, the prime minister struck a more conciliatory tone, saying the language "wasn't right".

"I wouldn't have used those words if I had known they were, or even would be interpreted as an echo of Powell," he said.

"I had no idea 鈥� and my speechwriters didn鈥檛 know either. But that particular phrase 鈥� no 鈥� it wasn't right. 

"I'll give you the honest truth: I deeply regret using it."

Two men and a woman have been arrested on suspicion of a terror offence after two aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton, police have said.

A second woman has also been arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender.

Counter Terrorism Policing South East said in a statement: "A 29-year-old woman of no fixed abode, and two men; aged 36 and 24, both from London, were arrested on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism, contrary to Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

"A 41-year-old woman, of no fixed abode, was arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender.

"The arrests, which took place yesterday [Thursday] in Newbury, Berkshire, and in London, are in connection with an incident in the early hours of [last] Friday during which damage was caused to two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton.

"Those arrested are currently in police custody while enquiries are ongoing."

Palestine Action posted video online claiming it was behind the vandalism at the Oxfordshire airbase last Friday.

A security review was launched across the "whole defence estate" following the breach.

Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said she "hopes" that changes made to the welfare bill overnight mean the government gets support from Labour rebels.

At least 127 Labour MPs had signed a "reasoned amendment" to the policy, before the government agreed a number of major concessions late on Thursday.

Despite this, a group of MPs have still refused to back the reforms.

Kendall said: "I hope these changes will mean we get support for our bill."

The minister added that there is "strength in listening" on the issue of welfare.

She said: "You end up in the right position when you talk to all of those with knowledge and experience and actually, if you want decisions to be the right ones and to last for generations to come, I believe that's how you make the right changes, with more to do, to talk to people over the coming days."

But pushed if she can guarantee the bill will pass its second reading on Tuesday, the minister could not.

She said: "I really believe these are positive changes. 

"We've worked hard to get agreement on this."

Kendall added that it is "very common" in the welfare system for there to be "protections for existing claimants", as there are in the reforms.

"But what I think is important about the changes we've introduced is they will make sure existing people aren't affected," she said.

"I know there has been real anxiety and concern, even though nine out of ten people currently on personal independence payments (PIP) wouldn't be affected.

"There has been great anxiety. We've listened to that."

But Kendall said she believes Labour is "in a good place" now.

Changes to the welfare bill announced overnight could cost between 拢2.6bn and 拢3.2bn per year by 2030, the Resolution Foundation has warned.

The group said the changes to the welfare bill "will create a two-tier system to prevent existing claimants from suffering income losses as a result of changes to universal credit and personal independent payments (PIP)".

However, they warned that while the changes are "welcome", they could cost between 拢2.6bn and 拢3.2bn per year by 2029/30.

This will "make it even tougher for the chancellor to meet her fiscal rules this autumn", the group said.

Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: "The concessions today mean that over two million people currently receiving support due to ill-health or a disability will no longer suffer income losses from forthcoming welfare changes.

"This is a welcome change that will reassure vulnerable claimants, as is the commitment to bringing forward employment support. 

"The concessions aren鈥檛 cheap, costing as much as 拢3bn and more than halving the medium-term savings from the overall set of reforms announced just three months ago. "

Things have changed since Thursday, when at least 127 Labour rebels had backed a "reasoned amendment" to the government's welfare bill.

Overnight, Sir Keir Starmer agreed a number of concessions to the policy, largely around the proposed changes to personal independence payments and universal credit.

Despite this, a number of MPs still aren't happy - and have said they will be voting against the bill when it returns to the Commons on Tuesday.

Use the search tool below to see if your MP is a potential rebel:

The government always knew slashing welfare spending would be highly controversial among its own MPs and traditional supporters - although much more popular with right wing voters.

Just a few days ago, Sir Keir Starmer dismissed the concerns of rebel MPs as "noises off", arguing his government was "reading the room" in its efforts to reform a "broken system" that has seen the welfare bill spiralling in recent years. 

Spending on working age disability and incapacity benefits is up 拢20bn since the pandemic, and is set to increase by almost that much again by the end of this parliament, to 拢70bn a year.

But while most in his party agree with the claim that getting more people back into work is in line with Labour values, cutting support for disabled people with the cost of living is much harder to justify.

It highlights the uglier truth that changing the welfare system is about saving money as much as the moral case for reform.  

The chancellor badly needed the planned 拢5bn in savings to balance the books and stick to her fiscal rules, which was reinforced by the decision to deepen the original cuts after the Office for Budget Responsibility predicted they didn't save as much as the Treasury had thought.

Cutting help for people who struggle to feed or dress themselves has enraged campaigners and MPs and terrified many disabled people.

But now the government has been forced to back track on these plans. They're facing a big black hole in the budget, as the 拢5bn in savings is baked in to the government finances.

Keeping personal independence payments (PIP) for all claimants is anticipated to cost 拢1.5bn. 

The Resolution Foundation estimates that figure could rise to 拢2bn once the linked eligibility for carers' allowance is also taken into account, and calculates that undoing the freeze on the health element of universal credit would cost another 拢1bn. 

So that's 拢3bn of the planned 拢5bn in savings wiped out.

Minister Stephen Kinnock couldn't answer where the money to pay for that would come from this morning, saying we'll have to wait for the budget in the autumn.

But for a government which promised no unfunded spending commitments 鈥� the u-turn bill is totting up, with 拢3bn in undone welfare savings, 拢1.25bn in winter fuel payments, not to mention all those big promises to NATO on defence spending too. 

The iron chancellor is looking increasingly wobbly.

As of yesterday, 127 Labour MPs had signed a "reasoned amendment" to Sir Keir Starmer's welfare bill, which questioned the planned reform.

The bill was intended to restrict eligibility for the PIP - the main disability payment in England- and limit the sickness-related element of universal credit, to help shave 拢5bn off the welfare budget by 2030.

But overnight, the government agreed concessions to this group of rebels, offering adjustments to the "pace of change" to personal independent payments and universal credit.

This has appeased some MPs - including lead signatory Dame Meg Hillier - but not all.

Here's a round-up of Labour members who have publicly said they're still not happy:

Richard Burgon said on X that the changes simply make "a very bad bill less awful". He said it is "nowhere near good enough" and he will "vote against the bill".

Nadia Whittome agreed "these concessions aren't enough and they should worry us all". She will also vote again the bill on Tuesday.

Peter Lamb said the changes are "insufficient when better options have repeatedly been put forward and ignored".

Brian Leishman said the proposed reform amounts to a "two-tier welfare programme that would still put people into poverty".

Rachael Maskell said it is clear that the bill "cannot and must not be saved". She added: "The only option is to withdraw the bill, rethink and start to rebuild trust with disabled people".

Ian Byrne also urged the government to withdraw the bill. He said it is "an awful piece of legislation that will cause huge and lasting damage to my disabled constituents and those across the UK".

Diane Abbott agreed that "dropping it is the only way". She said: "Phoney 'concessions' will not fundamentally improve [the] disability benefit cuts bill".

Clive Lewis said he will be voting against the bill. He said: "This smacks of a face saving exercise more than it does doing right by my sick and disabled constituents".

The government has made significant concessions on personal independence payments (PIP) and universal credit in a bid to quell a Labour rebellion against its welfare reforms.

More than 120 rebels had signed a "reasoned amendment" aimed at overhauling the policy, which significantly tightened eligibility criteria for disability benefits.

But what exactly was the government planning that caused such consternation?

Changes to PIP

The biggest shakeup to the system involved changes to PIP - money given to people including some of whom are in work - who have extra care needs or mobility needs as a result of a disability.

People who claim it are awarded points depending on their ability to do certain activities, such as washing and preparing food, and this influences how much they will receive.

From November 2026, people would need to score a minimum of four points in at least one activity to qualify for the daily living element of PIP - instead of fewer points spread across a range of tasks.

This would have impacted existing claimants as well as new ones. The government's concessions are understood to see this change dropped for existing claimants.

Overhaul of universal credit

The government intended to freeze the health element of universal credit, claimed by more than two million people, at 拢97 a week during this parliament, and cut the rate to 拢50 for new claimants.

Again, it's understood the government's concessions mean this change now won't apply to existing claimants.

It sounds like concessions are coming for the over 100 Labour MPs who had threatened to rebel over the government's planned welfare cuts.

On this episode, Beth Rigby, Ruth Davidson, and Harriet Harman went over the possible options for the Prime Minister. They also talk about what Keir Starmer needs to learn from the chaos of the past few days.

Plus, is President Trump the "daddy" in his handling of the Israel-Iran conflict, as NATO head Mark Rutte may have suggested?

Remember, you can also watch us on