Home News

Assisted dying in England and Wales has moved a step closer after MPs voted by a majority of 23 in favour of a Bill legalising it for terminally ill people.After an emotional four-hour debate in the Commons, 314 MPs voted for the Bill and 291 against.Supporters of assisted dying wept, jumped and hugged each other outside Parliament as the news spread that it had been passed.The Bill, which allows adults who have less than six months to live to end their lives, will move to the House of Lords for further debate and scrutiny.Public support for a change in the law remains high, according to a YouGov poll, suggesting nearly three in four people back assisted dying.MPs had a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decided according to their conscience and the arguments rather than along party lines.This was the first time Kim Leadbeater’s Bill had been debated and voted on in its entirety since last year’s historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55 at second reading. Labour MP Ms Leadbeater argued her Bill would “correct the profound injustices of the status quo”. Both Houses must agree on the final text of the Bill before it can be signed into law.Due to the four-year implementation period, it could be 2029 – potentially coinciding with the end of this Government’s Parliament – before assisted dying is offered.Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years.Supporters of assisted dying have described the current law as not being fit for purpose, with desperate terminally ill people feeling the need to end their lives in secret or go abroad to Dignitas alone, for fear loved ones will be prosecuted for helping them.Prime minister Sir Keir Starmer remained supportive of the Bill, voting yes on Friday as he had done last year.Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who had urged MPs to vote against the legislation, describing it as “a bad Bill” despite being “previously supportive of assisted suicide”, voted no. More

Council tax bills across the UK could soon see a major shake-up as a new Labour plan looks to make funding ‘fairer.’ Led by deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, the plans will ensure more government funding goes to areas with the highest need.The new approach looks to address issues in local authorities that are enforcing large council tax hikes every year while residents repeatedly see little return for this money. By making more central funds available to areas where demand is greatest, these areas will be more able to ask for lower council tax increases.However, this will likely mean that less funding will be available to areas where local services are not stretched, and residents have not been asked to pay such steep bill rises in recent years. As such, these councils could be forced to recoup the funding from maximising council tax revenue.A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) official told The Times that the current system has resulted in “perverse outcomes, where some authorities are struggling to provide basic services whilst others are better off”.Birmingham City Council raised its council tax by 7.5 per cent this year amid funding struggles More

Council tax bills across the UK could soon see a major shake-up as a new Labour plan looks to make funding ‘fairer.’ Led by deputy prime minister Angela Rayner, the plans will ensure more government funding goes to areas with the highest need.The new approach looks to address issues in local authorities that are enforcing large council tax hikes every year while residents repeatedly see little return for this money. By making more central funds available to areas where demand is greatest, these areas will be more able to ask for lower council tax increases.However, this will likely mean that less funding will be available to areas where local services are not stretched, and residents have not been asked to pay such steep bill rises in recent years. As such, these councils could be forced to recoup the funding from maximising council tax revenue.A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) official told The Times that the current system has resulted in “perverse outcomes, where some authorities are struggling to provide basic services whilst others are better off”.Birmingham City Council raised its council tax by 7.5 per cent this year amid funding struggles More

As Labour faces mounting backlash over plans to cut disability benefits, dozens of Independent readers have voiced fear, anger and despair over what they see as a betrayal of society’s most vulnerable.Their comments reveal the human cost behind the headlines: carers facing destitution, disabled people fearing the loss of their last shred of financial independence, and a pervasive feeling that the reforms are not about support, but punishment. Several readers spoke of lifelong conditions that make work impossible, and how benefit cuts would not help them back into employment, only into poverty. Others warned that the reforms are economically short-sighted, creating more strain on the NHS, social services and unpaid carers.Beyond practical concerns, many touched on the emotional toll of feeling vilified, dismissed or forgotten by politicians and the general public. Here’s what you had to say:It’s not just PIP cuts!It’s not just PIP cuts! It’s the cuts to the Universal Credit Health Element and Carer’s Element too that many will lose. Those who work part-time and do not claim PIP will lose out, and those who have paid in, getting contribution-based benefits, will be thrown under the bus by unemployment insurance, limited to six or 12 months, because they may have a partner, when normally they would claim in their own right. These issues are not being talked about. Disabled people in all these situations will lose massively and Labour have learnt nothing from the deaths of claimants under the Tories. They know and have heard the evidence, criticised the Tories for being cruel, yet they think this is acceptable.This is not about helping people into work; it is punishing them for being unable to do so!The ForceAre you worried about disability benefit cuts? Share your thoughts in the commentsGrinding existence of povertyI have fibromyalgia and many other chronic long-term conditions, and those 14 years under the Tories forced unnecessary austerity and cruel, draconian DWP cuts to the most vulnerable people in society, many with lifelong chronic health conditions, making work impossible, and no employer would give us a second look.Those years of horrific treatment by the DWP, constant demonisation and vilification in the media and press, being made to feel like a criminal for just being alive, although it is more like a grinding existence of poverty and constant scapegoating – which feels like a form of abuse via proxy, designed to wear us down until we are broken and prone to taking our own lives… I’ve been there!That this isn’t a national scandal on the level of the Infected Blood, Post Office Horizon, Windrush etc., is utterly shameful. But for decades, the disabled and chronically long-term sick amongst us have been treated as a drain on society – thus our plight is swept under the carpet and our lives deemed of no value.The Tories were ‘stealth culling’ us for years, but I never thought I’d see the day that Labour would carry through their callous policies.RedRocket68Insulting assessmentsSimply cutting benefits across the board isn’t the way to deal with this. There is undoubtedly misuse in the system, like in all systems, and that’s why there needs to be a workable structure in place to address this. Nothing here can or ever will be foolproof!The severely disabled and their carers need support, and not to be living in fear that they won’t be able to survive. Anyone who’s cared for someone knows what a hard, unrelenting job it is – often 24/7. Some of those making these assessments seem to be oblivious as to what disability means for those who can never get away from it. Insulting questions, which lead to people saying they can manage things they can’t, are just a small example of what people are faced with in these so-called ‘assessments’.Often disabled people face more challenges than most can imagine or are even interested in. Those who do get jobs face the daily challenge of getting there – especially if they’re dependent on a wheelchair.There’s no quick fix for this, and slashing vital payments certainly isn’t one!AmbigirlsThese cuts will break peopleNone of the arguments the government is using stand up to scrutiny; there’s no evidence which supports the cuts.The majority of the impact of disability is hidden outside people’s close circle, especially intimate, embarrassing, and financial issues.People do not realise how bad things are, or how a lack of support can destroy you.These cuts will BREAK people.Cuts will also negatively impact the economy and cause higher dependency and increased costs to the NHS and local services in the medium to long term.KittyKatThey’ve already cut mine by 36%Not badly so, but I’m disabled and have lived with not only the endless threat of losing my benefits – I have had them slashed (36%) and halted altogether. I wonder how far this has gone toward the destruction of my health, and yet there are many far worse off than myself.TomSnoutWe are where we areUnfortunately, the government does not have a time machine to go back and change decisions that some people may not like. We are where we are now. And where we are now is even higher taxes than the current record, to pay for even higher benefits spending, which, again, is already at a record (all in real terms).MarkConstant cycle of tortureIt’s not about ‘people who can work, should’. Realistically, no employer will jump at the chance to employ a disabled person – and if they do, it’ll be a constant cycle of torture for the worst affected, who will be forced – and it is forced—into work they cannot do. In six months or less, they’ll have worsened in health and require the services of occupational health. And what is occupational health going to tell them? Quit! Resign! You can’t work after all!This welfare reform needs total scrapping.VIMS2022Universal Credit won’t help carersThere will be many carers left destitute because the benefit system doesn’t allow them to claim any other benefits. Universal Credit doesn’t cover someone who’s unable to work due to caring responsibilities. They will get nothing!EverlastingI’ve been waiting five yearsI would love nothing more than to walk again. But this is my fifth year of waiting. In case you’re thinking I can’t be so bad, I have severe end-stage arthritis. What bone I have left is twisting. I’m pretty darn sure I’m not the only one.CynicalmeA vendetta against the most vulnerableHaving attended the consultations into the green paper, I witnessed so many who were terrified of how the cuts would rob them of their hard-fought careers.A warning for those calling for an end to disability support: these measures only save a pittance, so expect more cuts. If they can stoop low enough to give the most vulnerable a good kicking, then nothing will stop them going after pensioners next, who are the biggest slice, by over half, of the welfare bill after all.TalkingSenseEasy targetsPIP isn’t awarded because of your ability to work or not. Why cut PIP? To save money and pretend that those who have disabilities don’t have them anymore. And we are the easiest ones to target. Starmer has calculated that the ‘grey vote’ will be useful in the next general election, and voters will be upset if their granny and grandad die from cold. Children have voting parents and will grow up to be voters. But the disabled? Nah. Sub-humans without a voice. As I said, easy targets.News for him: disabled people also have loved ones who are voters, and we are voters too. I am about to be a grey voter, and I have a disability. Labour won’t be getting my vote ever again.LizzieMI feel like an expensive petI’m disabled. My partner works. I can’t claim any benefits due to her income. PIP is therefore my only source of income and independence. It allows me to get to my own appointments, and it pays for my prescriptions, eye tests, and dental care (not that it covers this—I haven’t seen a dentist in years due to the cost).PIP also makes me marginally less of a burden on my partner, as I can pay for my own prescriptions and even pick them up or get them delivered. To remove this money will drive me into poverty, make me rely more on my partner, and cost her more money. This will put pressure on our already strained relationship, as I will feel like an expensive pet, rather than a valued human being. It is cruel, vindictive and callous. I would have expected this from the Conservatives after the minefield they created throughout austerity, but for a Labour government to penalise disabled people in such a manner is bordering on political insanity – and the very definition of cruelty.SilvafoxWhy do they always pick on us?My husband is disabled, paralysed, uses a wheelchair – only one side of his body works. Due to other health issues, he can’t have a motorised wheelchair, so we have a manual one. I take him where he has to go. He is so stressed by all of this that his condition is worse. Why does the government always pick on people who cannot defend themselves? It happens all the time.BonniebellEmployers won’t take the riskThe problem with DWP trying to engage disabled individuals in finding suitable work leaves a lot to be desired. Employers are more reluctant to take on disabled people on the grounds that they have to look after them. They consider disabled people as cheap labour, and the cost of employing them far outweighs the benefits. There is a pool of people who have no skills, and that is disadvantageous, not to mention that disabled people have no history or record of having worked for a considerable time.KingdanielSome of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity.Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

Around 1.3 million people are at risk of losing key financial support after Labour’s welfare cuts, new analysis has found, as the worst hit areas in the UK are revealed.The changes will focus chiefly on disability benefits, with the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) most affected. This weekly-paid benefit is designed to help with the associated costs of having a disability, and is claimed by 3.7 million people.From November 2026, it will effectively become harder to claim as the eligibility criteria for it is tightened. Here’s what that could mean for your area:The government data, analysed by the Liberal Democrats, shows that around 1.1 million PIP claimants and 200,000 enhanced-rate claimants would lose some of their payment if their assessment were conducted after the changes.The statistics also break down the impact by constituency, revealing that more deprived areas are likely to be hardest hit.Liverpool Walton was shown to be the constituency with the most people who could lose support, followed by Blackpool South and Liverpool Riverside. Around 5,000 people in every constituency face losing some PIP payments.Under the new criteria, around 87 per cent of those claiming the lower level would miss out based on their last point score, the analysis found. A further 13 per cent on the enhanced rate – worth £110.40 a week – would also lose this entitlement.The government has faced strong criticism over the changes from charities, campaign groups and MPs since they were announced in March.Research from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that the plans threaten to plunge 400,000 people into poverty – higher than the OBR’s forecast of 250,000. Meanwhile, a report from a group of cross-party MPs on Monday found that disabled people could lose more than £10,000 a year as a result of the cuts.Prime minister Keir Starmer said on Sunday that he would not change course despite threats of a backbench revolt, telling reporters: “We have got to get the reforms through and I have been clear about that from start to finish.”Prime minister Sir Keir Starmer said “ More

Rachel Reeves has pledged to end the use of asylum hotels by 2029 as part of a spending review that saw the Home Office budget cut. Speaking to MPs in the Commons on Wednesday, the chancellor said her plans to reform the asylum system would save £1bn a year. However, Treasury estimates show that the Home Office still expects the annual cost to be £2.5bn by the final year of this parliament. Labour had already made a manifesto commitment to end the use of hotels for migrants, but Ms Reeves has now committed to doing this within four years. Refugee charities welcomed the news, saying that hotels are “hugely expensive” and isolate asylum seekers from local communities, but urged ministers to move faster.Where will the government put asylum seekers instead? The Home Office has been exploring the use of medium-sized sites for asylum seekers instead of hotels, including former student accommodation. They are also working with local councils to try to house more people in flats and other accommodation within communities. Home Office minister Dame Angela Eagle has said empty tower blocks, former teacher-training colleges and disused student accommodation are being considered as alternatives.Joanna Rowland, a senior civil servant at the Home Office, told MPs on Tuesday that the government’s providers were clear “that we are exiting hotels and we need to do that rapidly due to cost”. But she added: “We need to do the hotel exit and the alternative accommodation in a highly controlled way. If it was just an edict to close hotels, get dispersed, then we would end up with uneven concentration – and some local authorities, I know, are feeling that acutely right now.”Labour has moved away from Conservative plans to repurpose former military bases for migrants, as these sites are expensive to run and very isolated, and are often not close to local services such as doctors’ surgeries and schools. The controversial Bibby Stockholm barge contract was ended, and officials axed plans to use the former RAF Scampton site in Lincolnshire. But the Home Office is yet to provide further details on whether they would buy the new required sites or rent them, or to disclose which sites they are looking at.What else is the government doing to reduce the need for hotels?Ministers are also putting more resources into processing asylum claims and asylum appeals in an effort to clear the backlog of people waiting to have their cases processed. The Home Office has recruited more staff to assess claims, which has resulted in an increase in asylum claims being rejected. Once their claims have been rejected, applicants no longer qualify for Home Office accommodation and must either support themselves or go to local councils for emergency housing support. The number of asylum applications in the UK has hit a new high of 109,343 in the year to March 2025, up 17 per cent from 93,150 in the year ending March 2024.But the backlog of cases waiting for a decision has fallen to its lowest level since 2021. Home Office figures show there were 109,536 people waiting for an initial decision at the end of March 2025 – down 12 per cent from 124,802 at the end of December 2024 and the lowest number since December 2021.How much money will be saved, and how much do we currently spend on hotels? Asylum seekers housed in hotels account for around 35 per cent of all people in asylum accommodation; however, the money spent on hotels makes up a much larger proportion of the overall spend. Around 76 per cent of asylum contract costs, or £1.3bn, was spent on hotels in 2024-25, the National Audit Office found. Around 110,000 people seeking asylum were being housed by the Home Office in December 2024, with some 38,000 in hotels, the watchdog said. New figures from March show that 32,345 asylum seekers were being housed in hotels at that time. Under spending plans published by the Treasury on Wednesday, officials estimated that they would still have to spend £2.9bn on the asylum system in 2027-28, and £2.5bn in 2028-29. This year, asylum costs are expected to total £3.9bn. Is 2029 a realistic target? The Home Office’s top civil servant told MPs earlier this year that the department is aiming to bring hotel use down to “zero” but that this would depend on any “ups and downs”. Sir Matthew Rycroft, who has now left the top job, said: “Ministers will want to keep the committee and parliament updated on the total numbers [of hotels], which have fallen from over 400 to 218, but I do not think you should expect a gradual decline of that number down to zero neatly by the end of this parliament. Our aim is to get to zero by the end of this parliament, but there will be ups and downs.”Why are politicians so keen to clear migrant hotels? Hotels are more costly than other forms of accommodation, and private companies are making significant profits from providing hotel rooms to the Home Office. The day-to-day running of these hotels is often subcontracted, and in some cases, Home Office officials in charge of large hotel contracts have been unaware of who is providing vital services. According to testimony provided to MPs, sexual assaults, threats, and prostitution have taken place inside hotels, and children have experienced malnutrition due to poor food. Hotels can also be isolating for asylum seekers who are keen to get to know people in the community, with sites often located away from city centres. Hotels have also been targeted by anti-migrant rioters and activists, with several being attacked during last summer’s rioting. YouTubers have also visited migrant hotels to film themselves intimidating residents. What has been the reaction to the pledge? Refugee charities have welcomed the news but urged the government to go further. Enver Solomon, CEO of the Refugee Council, said: “Asylum hotels have become a flashpoint for community tensions and cost billions to the taxpayer, so ending their use is good for refugees, the taxpayer and communities. The deadline of 2029 feels far away, and we urge government to make it happen before then.”He added that asylum seekers should be placed “within our communities not isolated in remote hotels”.Charity Care4Calais said moving asylum seekers from hotels to accommodation within communities would be welcome and called for an end to the “for-profit asylum accommodation model that has created billionaires”. Chief executive Steve Smith said: “Asylum accommodation should be provided based on the needs of people seeking asylum, not the profits of private owners and shareholders. Involving local authorities in the delivery of accommodation in their areas would be a first step in that direction.”Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said the Home Office is still squandering money on asylum costs “because this government simply doesn’t have a plan on illegal migration”. More

Watch again as Rachel Reeves delivered her much-anticipated spending review on Wednesday (11 June) as the chancellor pledged to make working people “better off”.The spending review came after the government announced a massive expansion of who will receive winter fuel payments in a major U-turn following months of backlash.After weeks of speculation over what the changes would look like, it has now been confirmed that 9 million pensions will be eligible for the payment – a huge uplift from the 1.5 million pensioners who received the payment in winter 2024-25.The chancellor stood in the Commons to deliver the government’s spending review on Wednesday.Some of the announcements have already been made over the last few weeks, but were formally presented to parliament.Reeves was expected to announce:A £30 billion increase in NHS funding, a rise of around 2.8 per cent in real terms. An extra £4.5 billion for schools. A rise in defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP. £39 billion for social and affordable housing over the next decade as the Government aims to meet its target of building 1.5 million new homes by the next election. £15.6 billion of spending on public transport in England’s city regions £16.7 billion for nuclear power projects, the bulk of which will fund the new Sizewell C plant in Suffolk. An extension of the £3 bus fare cap until March 2027. An extra £445 million for upgrading Welsh railways. The Government has also promised £750 million for a new supercomputer – the UK’s most powerful – in Edinburgh. More

In the latest U-turn after months of backlash, the government has announced a massive expansion of who will receive winter fuel payments. After weeks of speculation over what the changes would look like, it has now been confirmed that 9 million pensions will be eligible for the payment – a huge uplift from the 1.5 million pensioners who received the payment in winter 2024-25. Here, The Independent looks at how the new system will work and who will be affected by the uplift. Rachel Reeves says more details will be revealed in the autumn Budget More