Keir Starmer, the British Prime Minister, faced internal opposition while pushing for a welfare reform plan that includes cuts to benefits for people with disabilities. The reform plan barely passed a vote in the House of Commons, but with dozens of Labor Party members defecting, there are assessments that Starmer's leadership is being tested.
According to the New York Times (NYT) on the 1st (local time), the controversial bill includes measures to strengthen the eligibility requirements for Personal Independence Payment (PIP), aiming to reduce welfare expenditure. The government initially expected the measure to save £4.8 billion (approximately 8.5 trillion won) annually by 2030, but as opposition grew, they decided to exclude existing beneficiaries from the reform and apply it only to new applicants.
This welfare reform was conceived to adjust welfare expenditure that has surged since the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the British government, the number of PIP recipients has more than doubled from 13,000 to 34,000 per month since the pandemic, and it has been revealed that many of them suffer from mental health issues such as anxiety and depression. Government estimates suggest that if the current trend continues, related welfare expenditures could reach £70 billion (approximately 130 trillion 484.2 billion won) by 2029.
Within the party, there was a prevailing opinion against the reform plan even before the vote, fearing it could threaten the lives of the vulnerable. The NYT reported that more than 120 members of the Labor Party publicly expressed their opposition to the bill.
In response, the government stated, "We will apply the reform plan only to new applicants," as they sought to mend the situation; however, the conflict did not easily subside. Concerns were raised about the 'dual standard' issue, where different regulations apply to existing beneficiaries and new applicants, and some members cited government data that "if the reform plan is implemented, approximately 150,000 people could fall below the poverty line by 2030," urging a review of the bill.
Ultimately, in the House of Commons vote held on the 25th, the reform plan was passed with 335 votes in favor and 260 against, but this is viewed as a manifestation of visible internal strife within the party. Considering the Labor Party holds more than 400 seats, it is assessed that a considerable number of members either abstained or voted against the measure.
The government has stated, "We will postpone the implementation of the changed eligibility requirements after consulting with disability organizations," and has provided additional adjustment plans; however, the internal party opinion has not improved significantly. Rachel Maskell, a member of the Labor Party, criticized, "Such cuts are not in line with our current age or the Labor Party itself."
This incident occurred just a year after the Labor Party achieved an overwhelming victory with over 170 seats in last year's general election, presenting another setback for Starmer, who has been plagued by accusations of policy retreats since coming to power. Earlier, Starmer had faced criticism for retracting proposals to reduce winter heating support, branded as 'policy reversals.'
According to a recent survey conducted by YouGov, the Starmer Cabinet, which achieved a regime change after 14 years, is experiencing a rapid decline in approval ratings. If a general election were held now, it is anticipated that the right-wing British Reform Party would emerge as the largest party. In the Ipsos poll, support for the Reform Party (34%) significantly outpaced that of the Labor Party (25%).
Starmer plans to finalize the reform bill in the House of Commons next week, but the internal divisions and leadership crisis revealed by this incident are likely to pose long-term challenges, according to the NYT.
Meanwhile, the welfare reform debate in British politics contrasts with the large-scale welfare cuts being pushed by the U.S. Republican Party. In the U.S., there are ongoing plans for large tax cut legislation that includes hundreds of billions of dollars in reductions to food assistance and health insurance, with relatively less internal disagreement.
The bill, known as the "One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBBA)," passed the U.S. Senate that day and is awaiting a vote in the House of Representatives.