This is not what we voted for says Karen Constantine of the government’s recent measures on welfare reform which she calls punitive and unfair hitting the poor and vulnerable
Welfare reform is challenging and complicated, especially after years of savage cuts and ideologically driven change, which the BMJ highlight as having caused declining life expectancy, poorer mental health and more children in care. Positive reform of our welfare system is needed, and we want the Government to succeed, to repair the social and economic problems, to rebuild public services, to solve the poverty and widening inequality caused by 14 years of Tory chaos.
The UK has always been able to pride itself on maintaining a strong welfare state — one that supports those in need. The Chancellor’s attempt at reform appears to many as punitive, shortsighted, and unfair; there are other ways of sharing the cake, a wealth tax of 2% on assets over £10 million would raise £24 billion per year.
People need a reasonable amount to live, these cuts are going to render many worse off, some believe that the undisputed figure of 250,000 more people thrown into poverty is an underestimate. Ultimately there can be no dispute about the intrinsic value of work. But it needs to be good work, cutting benefits won’t make workplaces more accessible, or bosses better — more understanding and supportive. The budget statement does not address the real needs of people to survive, nor the lack of decent, and well remunerated employment opportunities. Not to mention the optics. After WASPI, the Winter Fuel Allowance and continuing failure to end two-child cap, are Labour building the hope that people voted for?
It’s April soon, when our taxes increase and we face steeper consumer bills, including council tax, gas, water, electric, food and of course, employers face the additional cost of rising national insurance, the cost of which will undoubtedly be passed to the consumer. We are all going to continue to continue to feel the pinch. But some more than others. The scale of the cuts to welfare was deeper than many feared, Chancellor Rachel ‘there will be no return to austerity’ Reeves boldly stated that we will all be £500 better off by the end of this Parliament. That is a very long wait for a little jam, which may or may not materialise. A tenuous promise that will not sit well with the voters, already sick of austerity, politically fickle, who are about to head to the polling booths. Forthcoming local elections will be the acid test of the government’s fiscal plans.
I’m no economist, but I know we’ve already undertaken a great deal of belt tightening, we’ve experienced long-term austerity — and the fact that it just doesn’t work. Save for a very effective transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.
The £4.8B cut to welfare, will impact the very poorest and those with disabilities who rely on the welfare state safety net, (no freebies, annual wage increase, or additional salary top-ups through well paid lobbyist fees for them). The government are heaping a painful burden on those least able to bear more. Labour have extended austerity 2.0. They have donned the mantle of Cruel Tory. Indeed, the fear of these cuts, of being forced to live even poorer, more difficult lives has provoked outrage. MPs and councillors alike will be asked to signal their support or otherwise, “Are you for us, or agin us?” It’s a simple enough question.
This maybe Starmer’s Poll Tax moment. Asking more from the most vulnerable, especially in the absence of any progressive taxation for the super-wealthy and a refusal to flex the arbitrary fiscal rules will be a career defining issue for the Chancellor and her supporters. Voters will closely examine their constituency MP’s Parliamentary votes. Fury is being unleashed.
Of course, many MPs, councillors and activists are urging the party to be bolder. If Labour are serious about a second term, they need to get serious about dealing with wealth inequality. In the last decade the poor have become poorer. And the poor know it. Whilst the rich have benefitted exponentially, and they also know it. In Parliament, both the Conservatives and Labour argue against taxing the rich and for taking from the poor. Robin Hood could be forgiven for being confused.
Based on analysis of the budget it is predicted that,
- 250,000 people, including 50,000 children will be pushed into relative poverty. That is on top of 14.3 million already living in poverty.
- 3 million families will be worse off according to official government analysis, families stand to lose an average of £1,720 a year.
- The health element of Universal Credit will be cut by 50% for new claimants and then frozen.
- The governments impact assessment states that the average loss for someone on Personal Independence Payments (PIP) is £4.5k per annum. Currently claimed by 370,000 people. A further 430,000 who would have been eligible for PIP will now be ineligible.
Wealth cannot be built on cuts, by taking from the poor, no more than the economy be revived by the fiction of improved PIP assessments. The voter doesn’t care about Reeves’s fiscal rules. The Chancellor has restored fiscal head room to a wafer thin £9.9bn – it could and probably will vanish by the autumn. Reeves cannot rule out more tax increases, and may well make more cuts this year. This will hardly soothe either Labour supporters or detractors. Labour is already suffering its first major rebellion in the PLP, there is a growing list of MP’s who are publicly stating they will not vote for the reforms. Likewise councillors and members are both complaining and resigning, negatively impacting Labour’s success in the May elections.
Even though there were some positives in the Spring Statement, particularly around planning reforms, more investment in the construction sector, and increased housebuilding, activists are being met with hostility about welfare reforms, which the public know are welfare cuts. Indeed, complaints have been raised with the NEC about the treatment Labour canvassers are receiving on the doorstep. Activists are eschewing canvassing.
What people want is a fresh approach one that represents Labour’s traditional values of wealth redistribution and a vision that recognises the need to rebalance in favour of the ordinary person.
Labour needs to be bolder and braver and soon. The economy needs to be reshaped to tackle vested interests and to tax wealth. There are too many hungry, cold people. Fourteen years of unchecked wealth inequality has warped the country. Only Labour can, and must, balance the books in a just way. Punching down the poorest has to stop. It’s time to tax extreme wealth, and not punish the poorest.
Karen has been a Labour Party member for 43 years, and a councillor the past 10 years. She resigned from the Labour Party on 21 March. In her resignation letter to Keir Starmer she cited the following –
“Dear Keir,
I have no option other than to tender my resignation due to cuts to welfare and your government’s failure to apologise for historic forced adoption.”
Karen cited the fact that wards in her division are amongst the poorest in the UK. She also wrote:
“Youth unemployment in Thanet stands at 10.1%, equating to 935 individuals aged 18 to 24—the highest rate in the South East. The unemployment rate for 18 to 24-year-olds in Kent is 5.6%.
Thanet had the highest number of claimants in the county, with 11,023 people claiming PIP in April 2024, representing 9.6% of the population aged 16 and over. By January of this year, that number had risen to 12,058 PIP claimants in Thanet.
Furthermore, Thanet district experienced the largest increase in claimants over the year leading to April 2024, with an increase of 1,211 claimants (+12.3%). The new welfare policy seems wholly designed to save money by heaping more pressure on the shoulders of those who have the least. It is a punishing, intrinsically unjust and short-sighted policy.”