The MPs have approved the government’s profit bill, which was less than heavy water after the rebellion by Labor Backbencher last week.
Universal credit bill is expected To be classified as money billWhich means that it can be made law with or without a month with the approval of the House of Lords.
Measures apply cuts in the health -related element of universal credit for some contenders, while other parts of the profit ensure growth above inflation.
Bill had originally proposed to make it difficult for people to claim personal freedom payments, however, after the objections of Labor MPs, it has been scored to existing contenders and holds for the future.
Personal freedom payment (PIP) is paid to people with long -term physical or mental health conditions and is not associated with the savings or income of the recipient.
Conversely, Universal Credit (UC) means and is designed to help support unemployed or low paid people.
In order to return the bill from the MPs, the Disabled Minister Sir Stephen Tims said: “If you can work, you need help in the work, if you need help in work, the government should provide it, and those who cannot do the work should be able to live with dignity.
“Those are the principles we are doing.”
The government said that about four million families increased their income to £ 725 in the next five years, as a result of increasing universal credit standard allowance.
Despite the government’s climb last week, 47 labor MPs still voted against the law and supported a rebellious amendment by York MP Rachel Maskail.
During a debate ahead of the final votes, Mascel called the bill a “omnipotent”, resulting in people the result of various levels of UC, which depends on whether he claimed or subsequently claimed before or after April 2026.
He asked if someone who came out of the universal credit as his illness had reduced, but then there was a relax and needed a profit, which was already received will be honored at a lower rate than what was already received.
Sir Stephen said that Bill had already protected people in the situation he had described.
However, Mascel pushed his amendment into one vote, which receives the current rate of UC to people with ups and downs, rather than the low rate applied to new contenders. It was defeated by 334 votes.
The conservatives also made an amendment, which would have made more changes, including reducing payment for people with less severe mental health conditions and some foreign nationals out of certain benefits.
It was defeated by 103 by 416 votes. In the final vote, the MPs approved the 336 votes votes by 242.
Changes in Universal Credit will apply in Britain, while any measures related to PIP apply in England, Wales and North Ireland.
Last week – to ensure that the bill could be passed – ministers were forced to give the final -minute concessions, which announced that strict eligibility rules for the new PIP contenders would not be introduced until the review in the PIP assessment was completed.
The review – which is aimed at termination in autumn 2026 – will be headed by the Disabled Minister Sir Stephen Tims and co -made with disabled people and organizations who represent them.
During Wednesday’s debate, several labor MPs urged the government to strengthen the role of people with disabilities in the review.
Labor MP Mary Tidball said her participation in TimMS review should be “meaningful and protesters”.
Another Labor MP, Stella Crace said that disabled organizations should have veto power on any recommendation made by review.
Before the MPs started their debate, a United Nations panel expressed concern about the impact of the government’s proposals.
In a letter to the department for work and pension, the United Nations High Commissioner “asked about measures to address the risk of increasing poverty rate among people with disabilities, if the cuts are approved”.
The government had estimated that the bill would save £ 5BN in a year by 2030, although the concessions made to ensure that the bills could pass the bill, those savings have been almost erased.
Last week, Chancellor Rachel Reeves was asked whether the changes would increase. He said that he would not “speculate”, but he said: “There is definitely a cost for welfare changes that Parliament voted through this week and it will be reflected in the budget.”
