Labour rebels declare war over Starmer's welfare cuts
It is a year next week since the general election and Labour is marking the occasion with the biggest backbench rebellion of Keir Starmer's premiership. Overnight, scores of Starmer's MPs have signed a reasoned amendment to the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) Bill. This would effectively kill the Bill at its second reading next Tuesday if it passes through the Commons.
Of the 108 Labour MPs who have signed the amendment, ten are Labour select committee chairs. The key message being sent by the rebels is that these are not the so-called 'usual suspects' on the left of the party. Indeed, organisers made a point of adding the names of the Socialist Campaign Group last to the list, to send the message to party whips that dissatisfaction is felt across the whole party.
The government is now stuck between a rock and a hard place
The full list of names are here and they include the likes of Labour grandee Dame Meg Hillier, the respected chair of the Treasury Select Committee. There are ambitious new MPs too, like Yuan Yang. Adam Jogee and Polly Billington, plus prominent names on the so-called 'soft left' like Rosena Allin-Khan, Stella Creasy and Louise Haigh. They want more consultation on Liz Kendall's reforms, which would spend an extra £1 billion on getting people back to work and reduce the eligibility for PIP.
The frustration of the rebels is obvious. Paul Foster, the new MP for South Ribble, is among those to add his name this morning. He wrote on X that he 'attempted to engage privately and behind the scenes' to convey his 'deep rooted concerns' but that he and colleagues 'unfortunately haven't been listened to'. In 17 years as a Labour councillor, 'never before have I been placed in a position where I have ever had to vote against the whip. Never'. Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, is keeping her cards close to her chest on how she will instruct her MPs to vote next week.
The striking thing from the list of Labour rebels is how many have felt disrespected or sidelined by the Starmer leadership during the past five years. The fact that so many feel strongly enough to publicly break with the government, this early on, will raise questions over the parliamentary management of the 'soft left'. As one puts it, 'if you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.'
The government is now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Politically, it is hard to see how the government can proceed as planned. Fiscally, it is hard to see how they cannot. The OBR expects welfare spending to reach over £100 billion by the end of this parliament. If Keir Starmer cannot trim welfare by £5 billion without wrecking his majority of 156, what chance has he got at serious reform?
The one certainty is tax rises. As Paul Johnson of the IFS noted this morning:
Another £30 billion on defence. U-turn on winter fuel. Rebellion on plans which just slightly slow huge increases in spending on disability benefits. If spending goes only one way then so, inevitably, will tax. Historic increases already this decade. Looks like a lot more to come.
Kendall told MPs last night there was 'no route to social justice based on greater benefit spending alone'. Unfortunately for her, it appears to be an argument that is falling on deaf ears.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Any appeasement of anti-Israel fanatics is doomed to fail
Next week is shaping up to be one of the most exciting since the general election. There will be two key votes – the first on the Government's welfare reform plans in which dozens of Labour MPs are expected to rebel, risking losing the party whip and, therefore, putting their parliamentary careers in jeopardy. That will be closely followed by a vote on legislation to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist group, which the Government will find easier to win than the welfare Bill, even if ministers anticipate the Lords will kick up a bit of a fuss over the definition of terrorism and whether it applies to the hard-Left pro-Palestinian group. How Keir Starmer handles these challenges will tell us a great deal about his style of Government and his relationship with his own party. He already outraged parts of Labour by removing the whip from a number of MPs who rebelled against the whip over the continuation of the Conservatives' two-child benefit policy. A handful of those rebels still haven't been restored to the bosom of the parliamentary party and if that doesn't change before the next general election, they will not be permitted to stand as Labour candidates. That is the threat, explicit or otherwise, that will (probably) secure a parliamentary majority for the welfare Bill. And the number of potential rebels who would risk their careers in defence of Palestine Action is considerably smaller. But feelings are running high nonetheless. It's quite the conundrum for the Government. The Prime Minister and his foreign secretary, David Lammy, have made great efforts to avoid any accusation of exhibiting any form of leadership on the continuing crisis in the Middle East. Where previous Labour administrations stood proudly alongside their American and Israeli allies in opposition to the terrorist ambitions of Iran through its funding of various Islamist proxies like Hamas, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad, this Labour government prefers a strategy that the Foreign Office might describe as 'diplomatic discretion', or which the late Baroness Thatcher might have called 'being frit'. Iran has repeatedly promised to wipe Israel – an ally of the UK's right up until the loss of four previously safe Labour parliamentary seats to independent pro-Gaza candidates last year – from the map and has hardly bothered to hide its support for the principle of suicide bombings in Tel Aviv. Yet the prospect of the regime gaining possession of a nuclear weapon seems not to bother UK Government ministers overmuch, despite the nightmare scenario that is certain to materialise should the Ayatollahs ever get a big red button of their own. This is the context of next week's debate on whether, finally and belatedly, the Government ought to get tough with groups like Palestine Action who have gone so much further than peaceful and legal protesting. Much of the current wave of protests is founded on opposition to the West. In the last few days, the sea of Palestinian flags that has become so familiar in protest marches in our cities has started to be intermixed with placards warning the Government not to attack Iran and that doing so would put Britain and the US 'on the wrong side of history'. Those protesters should be clear that their preferred vision for the Middle East does not include Israel, with its very anti-Arab notions of democracy and tolerance. Those who protest that Iran should be allowed to develop their own nuclear 'deterrent' know exactly how such a deterrent would be used, and they're fine with that. This is the root of the conflict currently playing out in the region, a war, not just between nations but between ideologies. And supporters of Palestine Action, along with its reprehensible and violent tactics, are unequivocally on the side of the gay-hanging, women-murdering Ayatollahs. That, rather than any niceties as to the definition of terrorism, is what next week's debate should be about. Independents like Jeremy Corbyn and his motley crew of pro-Gaza MPs and perhaps a handful of former Labour colleagues can always be relied upon to oppose any measure that smacks of pro-Westernism, and they will vote accordingly. Starmer, meanwhile, will find himself in an unusual position. He has gone to great lengths in the last year to position his Government between two stools, between his own instinct to support Israel in its fight against Hamas terrorism and the need to avoid losing any more of the UK Muslim vote. He should have worked out by now that turning on former allies, allowing the International Criminal Court to issue arrest warrants for Israeli ministers and placing restrictions on military exports to Israel will never satisfy the crazed hatred of the Jewish state by a segment of the population. By lining up his MPs in explicit opposition to a group that wears its pro-Palestinian credentials on its keffiyeh, Starmer risks undermining much of his previous efforts to assuage an audience that can never be satisfied. We must hope that he accepts the futility of those efforts and abandons them.
STV News
32 minutes ago
- STV News
Scottish Labour MPs say enough is enough over benefits cuts
Keir Starmer hasn't had to worry too much about his 37 Scottish Labour MPs so far. They've been a pretty loyal bunch. And why wouldn't they be? All but one of them owe their elections to Labour's turnaround under Starmer – and the only one not elected last year, Ian Murray, is in the Cabinet. They all went through a ruthless selection process tightly controlled by Starmer and Anas Sarwar. Having had to deal with some tricky customers in the past, Labour HQ knew going into the general election that selection equals discipline, and by and large, they got the people they wanted. Because they're all new to Westminster, their expectations were limited when it came to big promotions – and Starmer delivered on his promise to put Scottish Labour at the heart of government, with many of the new MPs being given bag-carrying roles on the bottom rung of the front bench, as Parliamentary Private Secretaries. It takes being passed over for promotion at a reshuffle to really make an MP disgruntled and rebellious, and we haven't had one of those yet, so that's still to come. So far, only one Scottish Labour MP has become a serial rebel, and for a very specific cause: Brian Leishman, who represents Alloa and Grangemouth, has always been vocal in demanding more action on the closure of Scotland's last oil refinery in his constituency. The rest of the group has kept pretty quiet. That's not to say they've been totally happy – like Labour MPs across the board, there was real anger at the way cuts to Winter Fuel Payments were handled. But Scottish Labour MPs did most of their lobbying behind the scenes. Until now. For some of them, at least – enough is enough. This morning, we learned the names of more than 100 Labour MPs who have signed an amendment to welfare reform legislation that will cut around £5bn from the benefits bill. In England and Wales, the plans will restrict access to disability benefits, while across the UK, top ups to Universal Credit for those with long term health conditions will also be squeezed. Among the rebels are nine Scottish Labour MPs. Brian Leishman is among them, but the rest of the list are not your usual suspects. These aren't MPs on the left of the party, who have an ideological problem with Keir Starmer's government. A rebellion of over 100 MPs is more than enough to wipe out Labour's majority. If opposition parties also vote against the plans when they're scheduled to come before the Commons, it will inflict a huge blow on the Prime Minister. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch will be weighing up what would be more damaging and embarrassing for Starmer – defeating his flagship welfare reforms, or having them passed only thanks to Tory votes. The scale of the rebellion means some kind of u-turn is inevitable. Politics is about numbers, and the rebels have shown they have the numbers. By u-turning over Winter Fuel Payments earlier this month, Starmer will have emboldened Labour MPs and shown them that they could force more concessions elsewhere. A year into the Labour government, and finally we're seeing the Scottish group of MPs go in different directions. Labour whips won't forget the names of the nine Scots on the list, even if the government ends up conceding over its welfare reform plans. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Sky News
42 minutes ago
- Sky News
PM repeats 'moral case' for welfare cuts despite major rebellion among Labour MPs
Sir Keir Starmer has reaffirmed his desire to push through controversial benefit cuts despite a mounting rebellion among his own MPs. The prime minister said there was a "clear moral case" for his reforms, which include measures designed to slash £5bn a year from the welfare bill by 2030. While many Labour MPs initially indicated they backed the bill in principle, support has ebbed away over recent months amid warnings about the impact the cuts could have on the most vulnerable in society. More than 100 Labour MPs have now signed a "reasoned amendment" to oppose the government's proposals when they are put to a vote next Tuesday. However, speaking to reporters on the plane to the NATO summit in The Hague, the prime minister reiterated the case for the so-called Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) Bill, despite the building opposition from his own side. "There is a clear moral case, which is the current system doesn't help those who want to get into work," he said. "It traps people." Welfare system 'unsustainable' Sir Keir said around 1,000 people a day were going on to PIP - equivalent to the size of the population of Leicester. "That is not a system that can be left unreformed, not least because it's unsustainable, and therefore you won't have a welfare system for those that need it in the future," he continued. "So those that care about a future welfare system have to answer the question - 'how do you reform what you've got to make sure it's sustainable for the future?'" More from Sky News: Is PM going to have to give in again? On Tuesday, Downing Street suggested the vote would still go ahead despite the public concerns of some MPs - including influential chairs of select committees. Asked whether the government was confident it could pass the legislation, a Number 10 spokesman told reporters: "We are focused on delivering last week's bill and engaging, talking to colleagues, as to why this reform is so important."
