Welfare benefits changes proposed by the government would have hit people’s finances – and those of the council.
The potential fall-out prompted Labour-run Brighton and Hove City Council to spell out its concerns to the government about the fairness as well as the financial and practical implications of any changes.
The council spelt out those concerns in its response to the Labour government’s Pathways to Work consultation and submitted the response in advance of a parliamentary debate last month.
More than 100 Labour backbenchers threatened to rebel against the welfare bill – the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill – prompting two sets of concessions from the government.
Despite those concessions, 49 Labour MPs voted against the bill at its second reading when the principles and key measures were debated in the House of Commons on Tuesday 1 July.
The council said that “changes to personal independence payment (PIP) and the universal credit health component … risk pushing those affected into poverty, exacerbating health inequalities and increasing pressure on a range of council services.
“The council, along with other public sector and voluntary sector partners, will need significant additional funding in order to make our local response effective.”
To read the council response to the government consultation, click here.
After the date of the second reading was announced, Green councillors called a special meeting of Brighton and Hove City Council.
Green councillor Ollie Sykes proposed a motion asking the Labour leader of the council Bella Sankey to write to ministers to call for a pause to the reforms.
Labour councillors passed an amended motion resolving instead that the council respond to a government consultation.
The Labour deputy leader of the council, Jacob Taylor, said: “We try to avoid public arguments with the government and MPs – we think it’s much more effective to actually do the analysis and make a well-informed submission.
“We had significant concerns about the proposals … and the effect they would have on Brighton and Hove residents – and made that very clear in our response to the consultation.
“We were glad that the government listened and made significant changes.”
Councillor Taylor added that he did not intend to imply that the council’s lobbying was in any way decisive, saying that was down to MPs.
But he said that he believed that the council had taken a constructive approach, adding its voice to those of many others who shared the widespread concerns, rather than relentlessly tweeting criticisms.
Well Councillor Taylor, why did it take a motion from the opposition to generate a response? Or was it ” We were going to respond but not debate it or publicise our thoughts and intentions!”
Absolutely – the Labour councillors were so reluctant to step out of line with Keir and co in Westminster, it was painful to watch.
They tried to defend this dreadful and harmful policy proposal until right at the end, when even Labour MPs were distancing themselves from the cruel cuts they were trying to push onto disabled people. Only then, when the national policy was in tatters did they speak out. The whole thing was absolutely shameful!
Let’s be clear of the timeline here. The council ONLY submitted their response to the Government consultation on the 27 June, AFTER government has confirmed it would make major changes to its planned welfare cuts, aiming to avoid a rebellion by more than 120 Labour backbenchers.
The Bill started to properly collapse in its original form a week earlier, on the very day this group of councillors were defending their governments plans at a special meeting that had been called by opposition councillors on the 20 June.
Labour councillors could have made clear their concerns about the cuts at that meeting. They didn’t. They chose to defend the governments plans, and there were calls of ‘shame on you’ from the public gallery because of their defence of their party’s proposals.
The timing of Labour’s submission to the consultation is not coincidental. The FOI is clear that it was submitted by the council AFTER the government had backed down and changed some of the worst elements of the proposals.
If they are now trying to make the case they were against the proposals all along, it’s even more shocking. People at the 20 June meeting were witness to their dogged determination to not speak out against the government plans. To then make a submission about the original format of the plans, after thise plans had changed (follwoing disquiet from many MPs over the previous week and Keir Starmer formally announcing many proposals were shelved on the 26 June) is just more spin and game playing.
The dates on the information released via an FOI are clear that the council ONLY submitted their consulation response after massive national backlash and the plans had at that point changed.