The Guardian view on Labour's welfare rebellion: Starmer must learn from his mistakes

The Guardian

a day ago

A clash between the government and Labour MPs over disability benefits was foreseeable long before this week's Commons rebellion. That doesn't mean a crisis was inevitable. Compromise might have been reached before the 11th-hour climbdown that averted a defeat in parliament.
The conflagration that burned a lot of Sir Keir Starmer's authority was all the greater because trust had broken down. The twin causes were failure of political judgment in Downing Street and bad policy. The prime minister underestimated the potency of MPs' objections to the withdrawal of personal independence payment (Pip) from disabled people, and overestimated the capacity of his whips to bully and cajole his party into accepting the changes.
Those errors flowed from a more fundamental flaw – the conflation of public sector reform with fiscal consolidation in ways that raised justified suspicion about the underlying motive for the policy. Most of the rebels recognise that there are problems with the existing benefits system. The dramatic increase in Pip claims over recent years testifies to a deeper social malaise. This is an issue that needs to be addressed and in ways that, over time, cost less.
But that argument was obscured by the requirement to find £5bn in savings at short notice so that the Treasury might stay on track to honour fiscal rules. It was not credible to say the Pip cuts were devised with compassionate intent to 'fix' the system when the announcement was made days before the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, under pressure to find extra budget headroom in her forecasts, delivered the spring statement.
Nobody was fooled and Sir Keir was foolish to think they might be. The prime minister's defenders note that he has many competing demands on his attention. His crass and inflammatory dismissal of backbench complaints as 'noises off' was made at a Nato summit where the prime minister was focused on persuading Donald Trump not to abandon the alliance.
But the offending remark was not a slip of the tongue. It expressed impatience with any criticism that is presumed to originate from a recalcitrant left faction of the Labour party. This habit was learned in opposition when Sir Keir's strategy for winning power involved ruthless enforcement of message discipline and suppression of dissent. That reflex prevents the prime minister from recognising that his critics might hail from a wide cross-section of Labour and society, and might have valid points.
As a result, a dispute over benefit changes escalated into a crisis of confidence in the leadership. The result is a messy compromise that defers the question of how Pip should be properly reformed, while the Treasury's fiscal conundrum has become even more acute. The issue of disability benefits was always going to be uniquely sensitive for Labour MPs, who see the protection of vulnerable citizens and reinforcement of the social safety net as primary functions of their party. But the rebellion over Pip is unlikely to be the last such confrontation, especially if Downing Street doesn't learn the right lessons.
Using the language of public sector reform as camouflage on ill-judged budget cuts was a grave mistake, compounded by arrogant rejection of MPs' objections. The prime minister now has a difficult task repairing his authority and rebuilding relations with his party. If he does not understand the origins of the crisis, he condemns himself to repeat it.