Poverty and Welfare Policies

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 6th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Minister of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Dame Diana Johnson)]

It is a pleasure, as ever, to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Poole (Neil Duncan-Jordan) on securing the debate. He spoke with great passion and knowledge about how poverty affects the individual, the family and society at large. The real-world impact is where that really matters, as he just said.

My hon. Friend spoke in his maiden speech about the nearly 7,000 residents of Poole who struggle to cover essential costs from their monthly income. In his career in Parliament, he has continued to be a strong advocate for his constituents and for the disadvantaged in our society. He has rightly pointed out that poverty is both unfair and economically reckless, and that one of the most important legacies that we could achieve as a Labour Government is a massive reduction in poverty. My hon. Friend highlighted the devastation caused by 14 years of Tory Governments to the fabric of our society and the rising levels of poverty, in particular the cost of living that we inherited from the previous Government.

To start, I refer to the child poverty strategy, which was published only last month. Under the previous Government, a shocking 900,000 more children were added to the statistics for those living in poverty. The aim of our strategy is to lift 550,0000 children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. It is rightly a cross-Government strategy, but welfare policies clearly play a crucial part, not least the lifting of the two-child limit. I am proud that we are getting rid of that cruel policy, which affects nearly 2,000 children in Poole, 6,000 children in the Poole, Bournemouth and Christchurch local authority area, and 1.5 million children in Great Britain overall.

I was touched when I spoke with several stakeholders, including the Trussell Trust, following the announcement of the removal of the two-child limit on Budget day, because they gave me the breadth and depth of insight that comes from working with those families day in, day out. Hearing their views of how the change will be felt on the ground was humbling and hugely helpful to me.

Our strategy builds on the urgent action that we have taken already to help families since we first entered Government, which has included expanding free school meals to reach half a million more families on universal credit, our new £842 million crisis and resilience fund to reform crisis support in England, expanding free breakfast clubs, and investing in Best Start family hubs to deliver early intervention and support for new parents. We recognise that tackling the causes of poverty and delivering an enduring reduction to child poverty will take time. That is why we have been clear from the start that this will be a long-term, 10-year strategy. We have put in place structures, including a monitoring and evaluation framework, and cross-Government ministerial oversight to ensure that the strategy will deliver and that we can build on its success in future.

We know that the welfare system needs continuous reform to ensure that it supports the people who need it and is a platform for opportunity. Our welfare system is not a museum; since its creation, it has adapted and changed as society has adapted and changed, in recognition of the new challenges we face.

I want to address some of the points that my hon. Friend made. As the Minister for employment, I will say a few words about employment. We know that employment plays a vital role in lifting families out of poverty and in securing better long-term outcomes for children. That is why supporting good work will always be the foundation of our approach, and it is backed by increasing investment for employment support to £3.8 billion by 2028-29, so that people have the help they need to move into and to get on in work. That includes our plans to reform Jobcentre Plus and create a new service across Great Britain that will enable everyone to access good, meaningful work, and support them to progress in work, including through an enhanced focus on skills and careers.

My hon. Friend also talked a little about in-work poverty, and we know that low pay is a key factor. Our plan to make work pay will help more people to stay in work and will improve job security and boost living standards. From April this year, the national living wage will increase to £12.71 an hour for workers aged 21 and over—an increase of £900 a year for a full-time worker on the national living wage.

Access to suitable childcare has for too long been a barrier to progression for many parents. That is why we will invest £9 billion next year in policies such as creating new school-based nurseries and, as I have just said, rolling out free breakfast clubs. A cross-Government review of childcare is also under way, because we recognise that the current system is very complex for parents to navigate.

We also want to go further, so that every parent who can work will be able to enjoy the benefit of rewarding, secure jobs that enable them to support their families. Our ambitious labour market interventions include our inactivity trailblazers in England and Wales, skills bootcamps and the adult skills fund, which will provide a step change in the support that parents receive to help them progress in—as well as move into—work.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

The Carer’s Leave Act 2023, introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for North East Fife (Wendy Chamberlain), was passed in the last Parliament. At the moment, carers in work are entitled to unpaid leave from work, which helps them to stay in employment. Does the Minister agree that making that leave paid would tackle the much higher levels of poverty among family carers and further help those people, particularly those on lower wages?

[Dame Diana Johnson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising that point. I will take the opportunity to reflect on what she has said and write to her with a response. I will move on because I have only limited time, and there are quite a few other things I want to say.

My hon. Friend the Member for Poole also referred to welfare reform more generally. I reassure him that the “Pathways to Work” Green Paper builds on the principle that Government should support those who can work to do so, while protecting those who cannot. We have already made significant progress in bringing forward proposals from the Green Paper to transform the support that we offer. We are taking action to get the basics right and improve the experience for people who use the system of health and disability benefits, as set out in the Green Paper.

That includes exploring ways to improve trust and transparency in the personal independence payment and the work capability assessments, by reviewing our approach to safeguarding, recording assessments to increase trust in the process and moving back to more face-to-face assessments, while continuing to meet the needs of people who may require different methods of assessment. Of course, we also have the Timms review under way. As a result of our changes, there will be 50,000 fewer individuals in relative poverty after housing costs in 2029-30. That includes a reduction in poverty for both children and working-age individuals.

I want to mention universal credit and its adequacy, as well as the essentials guarantee that a number of Members have spoken about. We know that people are struggling, and we understand the critical role of universal credit in tackling poverty and maintaining work incentives. Since April 2025, our fair repayment rate has reduced the overall deductions cap from 25% to 15% of a customer’s standard allowance, allowing approximately 1.2 million universal credit households to retain more of their award for essential living costs.

We have also gone further by taking decisive action to address the basic adequacy of the universal credit standard allowance through the first sustained above-inflation rise in the basic rate of universal credit since it was introduced. That change will benefit millions of people when it is introduced in April, while maintaining the right balance between supporting those who need it, incentivising work and providing value for the taxpayer.

My hon. Friend also referred to the benefit cap. Removing the two-child limit is the fastest and most cost-effective way to reduce child poverty and will, on its own, lift 450,000 children out of poverty by the end of this Parliament. However, it is absolutely right that we balance maintaining a strong safety net for those who need it with encouraging personal responsibility and incentivising work wherever possible. Working people are much less likely to be affected by the benefit cap, which we will review at the appropriate time and as determined by the Secretary of State, in line with the statutory obligation to review the levels at least once every five years.

My hon. Friend gave the shocking statistic about a food parcel being handed out every 11 seconds. This Government absolutely agree that the number of people having to rely on food parcels is far too high, which is why we made a manifesto commitment to end mass dependency on emergency food parcels. As I have already said, our child poverty strategy and the crisis and resilience fund, along with renewed funding of £600 million for the holiday activities and food programme, will be a vital contribution to tackling such an important issue.

I am also working closely with the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs on this matter, and will meet with my ministerial counterpart at DEFRA tomorrow to discuss shared priorities. I would also be very happy to meet with my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool West Derby (Ian Byrne) to discuss the work he is doing. I know he has a long-standing interest in food poverty.

In the few minutes I have left, I will talk about international comparators, particularly around state pensions. It is difficult to make meaningful comparisons between state pension schemes in different countries because there are many fundamental differences in the way they are run and operated. There are many factors to take into account, such as different tax systems, the cost of living, access to occupational pensions, the availability of other social security benefits and the provision of services and goods, either free to pensioners or available at a concessionary rate.

The UK pension system balances sustainability and adequacy with the foundation of a contributory state pension, on which private retirement savings can be built, as well as an income-related safety net for those most in need. Workers can choose to make voluntary contributions to private or occupational pension schemes to increase their retirement income.

Data from the OECD’s “Pensions at a Glance 2025” report shows that the UK’s public expenditure on pensions is lower than the average of other OECD countries. Furthermore, when Full Fact investigated the claim that the UK state pension is the lowest in the EU, it concluded that the comparison is not fair because of the differences between pension systems.

In closing, our manifesto committed to building on the legacy of the last Labour Government, which lifted more than 600,000 children and more than a million pensioners out of poverty. It promised to put good work at the heart of our approach. We are building a welfare system that is much more active in giving people opportunities not just to get by, but to get on in life.

Importantly, we are making sure these reforms are accompanied by our wider efforts to put in place the right opportunities, incentives and support—by creating good jobs, by making work pay, including through our landmark Employment Rights Act 2025, which will benefit more than 15 million people, and by overhauling employment support, so that people get personalised support to overcome the individual barriers they face getting into work. Through all those changes, we can turn the tide on poverty, making a real, lasting difference to people’s lives and building a fairer, more prosperous country.

Question put and agreed to.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Monday 1st September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Torsten Bell]

I thank my hon. Friend for his crucial question. That is exactly why we have revived the landmark pensions commission. We have to confront the reality that we are on track for tomorrow’s pensioners to be poorer than today’s. Auto-enrolment has been a huge success, with 88% of eligible employees now saving, but 45% of working-age adults, including 3 million self-employed and one in four low earners, are currently saving nothing. The commission will ensure that we build a pension system that is strong, fair and sustainable.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

The carer’s allowance overpayments review was due to report in early summer. It is now 1 September. In recent weeks, I have become aware of a case where the DWP has informed somebody that they now owe it £18,000. That is a scandal. When will the review report back?

[Sir Stephen Timms]

We have received the report from Liz Sayce, and I want to thank her very much for her review of earnings-related overpayments of carer’s allowance. We are currently considering the findings. We are, as the hon. Lady knows, making a number of changes. We have increased the earnings threshold for carer’s allowance in a way that I think will help avoid these problems in the future. We are looking at the possibility of a taper on carer’s allowance. We will come forward, before very long at all, with both the report and the Government’s response to it.

Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Committee of the whole House & 3rd reading
Wednesday 9th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Iqbal Mohamed]

I am unable to comment on the people to whom the hon. Gentleman refers as “absent”. I am here to represent my independent alliance colleagues, all of whom strongly oppose the Bill as it is presented here today. It will adversely impact millions of people in our country—the people at the bottom of the food chain; the people who are struggling to feed their children, heat their homes, get to work, and keep appointments that are critical for receiving treatment that enables them to manage their conditions.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

The hon. Member talks of the difficulty faced by people with disabilities. Many millions of those people are supported by family members who are unpaid carers. Does he agree that although the Government have said that they will work with disability groups and people who have disabilities, they should also co-produce whatever comes forward in conjunction with carers’ organisations?

Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill

Alison Bennett Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 1st July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I want to begin today not with statistics or slogans, but with the reality of just one life: a constituent of mine, Sarah, from Hassocks. Sarah has a spinal cord injury. She is a wheelchair user, and this is what her personal independence payment makes possible.

It pays for underwear that does not dig into her skin, wedge pillows to raise her legs, grabber sticks, so that she can pick things up off the floor, and a second wheelchair to keep upstairs. It covers the use of a specialist rehabilitation gym that keeps her as healthy as possible. It allows her to buy heated blankets for the cold weather, because the cold weather makes her pain worse. It pays for specialist outdoor clothes from Norway to cover her legs, and in hot weather, it pays for extra fans, because the heat makes her injured body swell.

Sarah’s PIP funds a CPAP—continuous positive airway pressure—machine that runs 24 hours a day, connected directly to the hospital, because she has developed sleep apnoea, and it pays for the additional electricity to keep it going. It pays for a specialist mattress to prevent pressure sores, bathing aides and specialist body wipes for when cleaning herself is just too difficult. It pays for extra fuel for an average of four medical appointments each month, some in Hassocks and some as far away as London, and it has helped to make her garden accessible so that there is at least one part of her home where she feels free. These are not luxuries; they are the bare essentials that allow Sarah to live in dignity, with some measure of independence.

Sarah told me she has no faith in the system operated by the Department for Work and Pensions and no trust that fair and just decisions will be reached, because in her experience, the DWP’s overriding drive is not to understand but simply to cut.

[Deirdre Costigan (Ealing Southall) (Lab)]

I wonder whether the hon. Member has told her constituent, Sarah, that under these proposals, nobody who is currently on PIP will have a single penny of their income cut, and they will be protected for time immemorial.

[Alison Bennett]

I did not need to explain that to Sarah—she fully understands that—and I am about to address that point.

The Government’s last-minute climbdown has brought Sarah no comfort, because she never imagined she would be in a wheelchair. She never thought her life would change forever in an instant, and she knows that for thousands of people, that change is still to come. Life can turn on a sixpence—a single diagnosis, a single accident—and suddenly we find ourselves in a world we never imagined, up against barriers we never thought we would face. When that happens, the welfare system should be there to support us, not abandon us.

It is not just disabled people themselves who will be harmed by this Bill; it is also the millions of family carers—the unpaid carers—whose labour sustains our entire health and social care system.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

Does my hon. Friend share my concern about the fate of unpaid carers, given that carer’s allowance hinges on a disabled person receiving PIP? With one in five people in my constituency who are disabled, which is well above the national average, should the Secretary of State commit to delinking carer’s allowance from PIP eligibility, or as a minimum, to providing automatic transitional payments during PIP reassessments, so that devoted carers are not left destitute while assessments drag on?

[Alison Bennett]

My hon. Friend makes a wise point. In my constituency of Mid Sussex, one in four carers are themselves disabled. Carers UK has warned in the clearest possible terms that the Bill still risks a severe and lasting financial impact on future unpaid carers and disabled people—people already facing significant hardship. Even after the Government’s partial concessions, around 81,000 future carers stand to lose support by 2029-30. That is not a small technical change; it is a decision that will push families closer to poverty, create a two-tier system of entitlements, and deepen inequalities.

Let me be clear: the Government have produced no impact assessment, no comprehensive evidence of what this will mean, and there has been no consultation with carers themselves. Carers have been ignored by the Government throughout this entire debacle, and their voice must now be heard loud and clear. The Liberal Democrats will continue to oppose the Bill, which risks stripping thousands of carers of vital assistance, and leaving some of the most vulnerable people in Britain without support. Yes, we agree that the welfare bill is too high, but if the Government were serious about bringing it down, they would be serious about fixing health and, critically, social care at pace, tackling chronic ill health at its root, rather than punishing those who live with its consequences.

Sarah told me that she wanted to speak up not for herself but for that future community of disabled people. In truth, most able-bodied people think that they understand disability, but until someone is there, they cannot comprehend the world of barriers that are thrown up. For many, that day will come after this Government’s reforms have been forced through. That is why I say to Ministers that they should pause the Bill and go back to the drawing board. They should consult the people whose lives they are about to upend, and show them the basic respect of listening before they legislate to take away their support. If we do not stand with disabled people and carers now, and if we do not insist on compassion and fairness at the heart of our welfare system, we will all pay the price later, not just in higher costs to the NHS and social care, but in the erosion of the values that bind our communities together.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Monday 23rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alison McGovern]

Our Department is determined to serve businesses well. If the right hon. Member would like to help his local jobcentre do that and get good jobs into the jobcentre so that we can help his constituents, I am sure that I can facilitate that. However, he should be aware that employment is up and inactivity is down. We are moving towards an 80% employment rate, and the Chancellor’s investment plans, as she set out in the spending review, will help us move towards that.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

The Government’s proposals to change benefits have a compound consequence for people wanting to stay in work. For example, the Department has said that 95,000 working-age claimants receive carer’s allowance and, under the proposals, would lose the PIP they receive. Does the Minister agree that those proposals will actually make it harder for people to stay in work, rather than easier as they claim?

[Alison McGovern]

As the Secretary of State set out some moments ago, we are introducing the biggest improvement to employment support that the country has known. We will ensure that people receive the help they need to get into work and to stay in work.

Winter Fuel Payment

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Monday 9th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Torsten Bell]

That is exactly the point I have just made: what are Labour Governments here for? Building a fairer Britain. What did the last Labour Government do? They brought down child poverty, halved pensioner poverty and raised wages year after year. That is what this Government will do again.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I have listened to the Minister’s statement and read the words, too, and nowhere can I see an explanation for why this decision has come now, 11 months after it was first announced. Why has this decision come now? Will we have to wait another 11 months for the Government to rethink their cuts to disability benefits?

[Torsten Bell]

I have just explained why we are making this announcement now: we want to ensure that the payments can be made in time for the winter. I have not hidden from the fact that last year we made the difficult decision to means-test the winter fuel payment, and that was the right choice to make, but we have listened, which is why we have announced a higher means test. I have directly answered the hon. Member’s question.

This is important, but we do need to make some tough decisions. I know that the Liberal Democrats want a universal winter fuel payment, because they think it right to pay hundreds of pounds to millionaires, but I take a different view. I think it is that kind of wishful thinking that created, in 2010, a Liberal Democrat Government who promised to scrap tuition fees and ended up trebling them.

Seriously Ill Children: Financial Support for Parents

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 25th March 2025 Westminster Hall

[Chris Hinchliff]

I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. I encourage the Minister to reflect on the fact that all the evidence we hear from It’s Never You shows that this very real problem is impacting families right across the country.

The systems that are in place were not designed to accommodate the urgent and unpredictable nature of childhood illness. Studies have shown that delays in financial support during critical life events significantly increase psychological stress and deepen financial instability. Research published in the Journal of Pediatric Psychology found that economic insecurity heightens parental stress, which can in turn hinder a family’s ability to provide the best possible care for their child.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

I thank the hon. Member for his excellent advocacy for Hugh’s law since his election to Parliament. I wholeheartedly agree with the campaign. Two families wrote to me in anticipation of this debate. One family’s child was diagnosed with stage 4 liver cancer at the age of just two. They were forced to drastically reduce their joint working hours so they could not only care for their sick child but also look after their other children. It is an enormous burden:

“No parent should face financial ruin while fighting for their child’s life.”

Does the hon. Member agree that day one support for these parents, as advocated by the Hugh’s law campaign, would be very welcome?

Welfare Reform

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Liz Kendall]

I know that my hon. Friend cares passionately about these issues, and I have spoken to her about them many times. I absolutely agree, and we commit that people who will never be able to work because of the severity of their disability or health condition will be protected. In fact, by never going back and reassessing those people, I hope that we will make a positive improvement, giving them the dignity and respect they need and deserve.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

Culture matters. Those who have been victims of the carers’ overpayment scandal describe the culture at the DWP as spirit-crushing, but the culture of the Government matters too. Last week, I spoke to my constituent Geoff, who lives in Haywards Heath and is partially sighted. He told me that he and the partially sighted community have been sick with worry about what is being brought forward today. Does the Secretary of State think that the pitch rolling that has gone on over the past 10 days is the right way to make these kinds of announcements?

[Liz Kendall]

I hope that from now on, hon. Members will focus on the proposals that we are actually putting forward. Culture really matters—that is why we launched an independent investigation into the carer’s allowance overpayments; we want not just to be told that we are putting things right but for independent voices to say that. Many of our work coaches in jobcentres are absolutely wonderful, but I have heard from other hon. Members about work coaches ringing deaf people. We must start changing that, looking at our training processes and putting all these things right so that everyone is treated with the dignity and respect they deserve.

Oral Answers to Questions

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Monday 3rd February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

I call Alison Bennett.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

T3. Thank you, Mr Speaker.“We’re saving the government millions.”Those are the words of Stephanie from Burgess Hill, a full-time carer for her 89-year-old mum. With carer’s allowance not even covering Stephanie’s petrol costs, what assessment has been made of the adequacy of carer’s allowance in meeting the true costs of care?

[The Minister for Social Security and Disability (Sir Stephen Timms)]

The hon. Member will know that we introduced the biggest ever increase in the earnings threshold for carer’s allowance for those who are able to combine some work with caring. We are determined that carers should get the support they need—there is a premium in universal credit as well, for example—but of course, we will keep all these matters under review.

Agricultural Property Relief

Alison Bennett Excerpts

Tuesday 28th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon]

Thank you for that clarification, Mr Stringer. I did not intend to put you under any pressure. I wish you well and thank you for your chairship.

I thank the hon. Member for Caerfyrddin (Ann Davies) —I hope my pronunciation is right, with my Ulster Scots accent—for securing this important debate on a matter of grave concern for many constituents and communities across the United Kingdom, and for those that I proudly represent as the Member of Parliament for Strangford. I declare an interest as a member of the Ulster Farmers’ Union, a farmer and a landowner. All my neighbours—every one of them—are concerned about this issue, and they have expressed that to me very clearly.

Farmers are the backbone of our rural economy. Their work provides not only the food that graces our tables but the stewardship of our natural landscapes, which are an integral part of our cultural and environmental heritage. Yet the changes to APR threaten to destabilise that foundation. I have spoken to farmers in my constituency and beyond, and their message is clear: the changes will place a substantial financial burden on farming families, forcing many to sell land to cover tax liabilities.

In response to a survey by the Country Land and Business Association, 86% of farmers indicated that they would need to sell all or part of their land if APR were removed. I understand that approximately 70% of farms in Northern Ireland—that comes from the Ulster Farmers’ Union legal officer—will be affected, because the farms are smaller.

It is really important that we get this right. Farmers have faced unrelenting challenges in recent years, including soaring energy and fertiliser costs, unpredictable weather patterns and inflationary pressures. The past decade has been marked by uncertainty. The loss of APR would mean that future generations could face unsurmountable inheritance tax. For smaller farms, especially, that could spell the end of their viability. The reality is that the changes will sweep up in their net many genuine, hard-working family farms. It is not just a financial issue; it is a matter of fairness, community sustainability and food security.

The Minister is an honourable person, but let us be honest and reasonable: what is right and what is wrong? Justice is what we are looking for here, and that must be addressed. When global supply chains are increasingly fragile, it is unwise to undermine domestic food production. Every acre lost to inheritance tax obligations reduces our ability to feed our population sustainably and affordably.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

Clearly, many Members on both sides of the Chamber are incredibly concerned by the Government’s proposals to cut agricultural property relief and business property relief. Farmers from my constituency came to see me and they are incredibly worried. In an area with high land values but relatively small farms, they think that they will lose their farms. Does the hon. Member agree that, as well as having a global impact, losing those farms will be incredibly detrimental to the rural economy—to veterinary practices, agricultural merchants and other businesses attached to farming?

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the hon. Lady for that intervention. With those wise words, she has hit the nail on the head. When the Minister looks round this Chamber, he will see that everybody—those who have spoken and those who are here—is united against the change to APR. We are not going to put the Minister under pressure unduly, but if it were me, I would think twice about getting into a fight where it was 27 to one.