Chancellor Rachel Reeves has declined to personally apologise for comparing benefits to pocket money, despite acknowledging it was "not the right analogy" when used by Treasury Minister Darren Jones.
The comments came during a fiery grilling by the Treasury Select Committee, chaired by Dame Meg Hillier.
Reeves faced scrutiny over remarks she made on LBC when defending benefit cuts, announced in the Spring Statement.
Discussing the cuts at the time, Reeves claimed: "My children and the chief secretary's children are too young, but if you have a 16-year-old, and you say, 'you know what, I'm not going to give you so much pocket money. I want you to go out to work'.
"And then the [Office for Budget Responsibility] does an impact assessment and says your child is going to be worse off - well, they're going to be worse off if they don't go and get themselves a Saturday job.
"But if they do go and get themselves a Saturday job, they'll probably be better off, and they probably might enjoy it as well. Now, that's not the right analogy, but there are lots of people who have a disability that are desperate to work."
However, the Chancellor acknowledged to the committee that comparing pocket money to personal independence payments was "clearly not right".
Reiterating Jones's apology for his "tactless" remarks, Reeves claimed he had used "clumsy language".
She also insisted her own comments were different, telling Dame Meg Hillier: "I don't think I made the same comments."
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
When asked directly by Hillier if she wished to apologise for her comment, Reeves explained she had been responding to a specific question about Jones' pocket money analogy.
"It's not a right analogy, and apologies have already been made," the Chancellor told the committee.
She attempted to distance herself from Jones' remarks, stating again: "I don't think I made the same comments."
Reeves concluded by acknowledging the inappropriateness of the comparison, stating: "That analogy of comparing pocket money and personal independence payments is clearly not right."
Following the Chancellor's Spring Statement, an estimated 800,000 people are set to lose out on personal independent payments (Pips) by 2030.
More than three million families will on average be £1,720 a year worse off by 2030, as a result of these cuts.
A further two million people currently receiving a health top-up to universal credit will lose an average of £500 a year as a result of the freeze announced by the Government, and 730,000 future recipients will lose out.
Find Out More...
The comments came during a fiery grilling by the Treasury Select Committee, chaired by Dame Meg Hillier.
Reeves faced scrutiny over remarks she made on LBC when defending benefit cuts, announced in the Spring Statement.
Discussing the cuts at the time, Reeves claimed: "My children and the chief secretary's children are too young, but if you have a 16-year-old, and you say, 'you know what, I'm not going to give you so much pocket money. I want you to go out to work'.
"And then the [Office for Budget Responsibility] does an impact assessment and says your child is going to be worse off - well, they're going to be worse off if they don't go and get themselves a Saturday job.
"But if they do go and get themselves a Saturday job, they'll probably be better off, and they probably might enjoy it as well. Now, that's not the right analogy, but there are lots of people who have a disability that are desperate to work."
However, the Chancellor acknowledged to the committee that comparing pocket money to personal independence payments was "clearly not right".
Reiterating Jones's apology for his "tactless" remarks, Reeves claimed he had used "clumsy language".
She also insisted her own comments were different, telling Dame Meg Hillier: "I don't think I made the same comments."
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
- Rachel Reeves refuses to rule out MORE tax hikes for Britons in intense grilling from MPs
- DWP reform to spark surge in Britons claiming benefits payments with extra 400,000 out of work
- 'Bad deal for British taxpayers!' Priti Patel RIPS into Labour for Chagos agreement
When asked directly by Hillier if she wished to apologise for her comment, Reeves explained she had been responding to a specific question about Jones' pocket money analogy.
"It's not a right analogy, and apologies have already been made," the Chancellor told the committee.
She attempted to distance herself from Jones' remarks, stating again: "I don't think I made the same comments."
Reeves concluded by acknowledging the inappropriateness of the comparison, stating: "That analogy of comparing pocket money and personal independence payments is clearly not right."
Following the Chancellor's Spring Statement, an estimated 800,000 people are set to lose out on personal independent payments (Pips) by 2030.
More than three million families will on average be £1,720 a year worse off by 2030, as a result of these cuts.
A further two million people currently receiving a health top-up to universal credit will lose an average of £500 a year as a result of the freeze announced by the Government, and 730,000 future recipients will lose out.
Find Out More...