Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill: Second Reading
335
Ayes
—
260
Noes
Passed · Government won
49 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** The House of Commons voted on the Second Reading of the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill on 1 July 2025, passing it by 335 votes to 260. A Second Reading is the first full debate on a bill's general principles, and a vote in favour allows it to proceed to detailed scrutiny in committee. The government backed the bill, and it passed with a majority of 75. **Why it matters:** The bill sets out reforms to Universal Credit (UC) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP), the two largest working-age benefit programmes in Britain. UC supports people on low incomes or out of work, while PIP provides financial help to disabled people and those with long-term health conditions. The passage of this Second Reading means the government's proposed changes to both systems will now be examined in detail by a committee of MPs. These reforms will directly affect millions of claimants across the country, making it one of the most significant pieces of welfare legislation in recent years. **The politics:** The vote revealed significant division within the Labour Party, with 299 Labour MPs and 36 Labour and Co-operative MPs voting in favour, but 47 Labour MPs and 3 Labour and Co-operative MPs voting against. Every Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Scottish National Party, Reform UK, Plaid Cymru and Green MP voted in opposition, as did the Democratic Unionist Party, forming an unusual cross-party bloc against the bill. The scale of Labour dissent on a government bill at Second Reading is notable, suggesting substantial internal concern about specific elements of the reforms, particularly among MPs worried about the impact of proposed PIP and UC changes on disabled people and low-income households.
Voting Aye meant
Support allowing the welfare reform bill to proceed, backing the government's plan to tighten eligibility for disability and incapacity benefits to reduce spending and encourage employment
Voting No meant
Oppose the bill proceeding, arguing the cuts to disability benefits are harmful to vulnerable people and that the reforms go too far in restricting access to PIP and Universal Credit health components
595 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 49 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
299
47
16
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
98
18
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
0
70
2
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
36
3
3
Independent
2
11
—
Scottish National PartyWhipped No
0
9
—
Reform UKWhipped No
0
7
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
4
1
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
4
—
Plaid CymruWhipped No
0
4
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
2
—
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
1
—
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
0
1
—
Defended the Bill as essential welfare reform to fix a broken system, protect those with severe conditions, and increase employment support to £1 billion annually; acknowledged concerns and made concessions to protect existing PIP claimants.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (3,079 words) →
Opposed the Bill as a rushed, incoherent attempt to plug the Chancellor's fiscal hole; argued welfare spending is spiralling unsustainably and the Bill will not achieve meaningful reform or get people into work.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (3,060 words) →
Moved a reasoned amendment backed by 138 disabled people's organisations, arguing the Bill lacks proper consultation, co-production, and evidence; warned it will push 150,000 into poverty and cause harm to vulnerable constituents.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,642 words) →
Supported the reasoned amendment, criticising the Bill's two-tier approach as unjust and unBritish; called for proper consultation and co-design with disabled groups before proceeding.Liberal Democrat · Voted no · Read full speech (918 words) →
Acknowledged positive measures but expressed serious concerns about harm to newly disabled people and the predetermined four-point PIP criterion; urged the Government to remove the four-point reference and delay UC LCWRA changes.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,428 words) →
Strongly opposed the Bill, warning that voting for it will push 150,000 into poverty and damage the Labour brand; cited the failure of the 2015 Welfare Reform Bill and warned constituents will not forgive support for rushed harmful legislation.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (940 words) →
Opposed the Bill as tinkering that saves only 1% of welfare spending and lacks a coherent reform strategy; argued the Government should pause and design a proper multi-stage assessment process.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (1,112 words) →
Opposed the Bill, voicing constituent concerns about rushed changes without consultation; warned it will increase poverty, worsen mental health, and undermine employment prospects for disabled people.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,531 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0