A few days later, it was revealed that Keir Starmer and his ministers made emergency concessions on their welfare reform program. These changes aimed to prevent the humiliating defeat of the program in the House of Commons.
While U-turns are expected in government, this particular situation was handled quite messy, as highlighted by a late-night Downing Street statement caving in to backbench Labour pressure.
Various opinions exist as to what led to this situation, but a common viewpoint is that the government has been disconnected from its own Members of Parliament (MPs).
Concerns about elements of the plan were evident from the moment Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, introduced consultative proposals to overhaul welfare payments. Particularly, the plans would significantly tighten eligibility for personal independence payments, causing worry among MPs and numerous charities.
Despite having a large Commons majority, the Labour government continued with the plan, leading one veteran Labour MP to criticize their arrogance and lack of consideration for potential rebellion from new Labour MPs.
Marginalized by Starmer’s busy schedule, MPs took action. The critical moment arrived with an amendment intended to kill off the welfare bill. Initially signed by 108 Labour MPs, it soon gained the support of more than 120.
This included senior backbenchers and newly elected MPs, raising questions about the loyalty of those referred to as “Starmtroopers.”
The problem reportedly dates back to the early days of the parliament, when a strict discipline led to the suspension of seven Labour MPs over a vote on the two-child benefit cap. Loyal MPs were even pressed never to submit amendments or make their views known publicly.
Many MPs expressed their dissatisfaction with the Labour government’s handling of the situation. Concerns included limited outreach efforts focused on presentations and charts, dismissive attitudes, and threats of a general election or even deselection.
Eventually, the Labour government bowed to the inevitable and used a Commons statement to announce a welfare rethink. This forced change highlights the disconnect between Prime Minister Starmer and the everyday challenges faced by MPs in Parliament. This incident has raised concerns about Starmer’s leadership and the role of his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney.
The response to the situation varies, with some advisers defending the moderate nature of the proposed reforms and the importance of passing the government’s agenda. Meanwhile, others express outrage at the potential waste of Labour’s historical majority.
For many Labour MPs, the underlying issue is the government machine’s failure to listen to concerns. The cuts were not seen as effective in helping people get into work and could worsen the situation for the most vulnerable. The party’s arrogance is now seen as the root of this political mess.
