Keir Starmer is about to face the biggest rebellion of his tenure. On Tuesday (24 June), more than 100 MPs put their name to an amendment which would engineer the opportunity for the government’s controversial welfare reforms to be rejected in full.
First announced by the Work and Pensions Secretary, Liz Kendall, earlier this year, the welfare reform bill includes proposals to make it harder for disabled people with less severe conditions to claim personal independence payment (Pip). In the weeks and months since, several Labour MPs have privately voiced their concern over the cuts (as one put it to me, they feel that the reforms “aren’t very Labour”). For many on the backbenches, the first time they heard about the government’s plans was during Kendall’s Commons announcement; to many, the perceived brutality of the cuts came as a surprise.
Now 108 of them have gone public. The amendment, which has been brought by Meg Hillier, was published this morning. It calls for “the reform of the social security system” before listing all of the reasons why the welfare reform bill must be rejected by MPs. It details the number of people the cuts are expected to push into relative poverty and describes an inadequate impact assessment on the consequences the cuts will have on the job market and people’s health. If it is selected by Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, and a majority of MPs vote to pass it through, Kendall’s bill will be stopped from making its way through Parliament and becoming law.
Among the rebels are some usual suspects; Clive Lewis, Ian Byrne, Stella Creasy and Nadia Whittome have all put their names to Hillier’s amendment. The sacked former Transport Secretary, Louise Haigh has also backed it, alongside Vicky Foxcroft, a former government whip who resigned last week in protest of the proposed disability cuts.
The Deputy Prime Minister, Angela Rayner, refused to rule out punishment for the Labour MPs who decide to vote against the government’s bill while standing in for Starmer at PMQs last week. It is less than a year since the government removed the whip from seven MPs (including Byrne) for voting against the Winter Fuel Payment. John McDonnell, Apsana Begum and Zarah Sultana – who were part of the seven – have still yet to get the whip back (all three MPs have put their names to Hillier’s amendment).
Most interestingly, however, are the members of the new intake who have come forward in opposition to the reforms. Brian Leishman, the MP for Grangemouth and Alloa, who was elected last year, said: “I joined the Labour party because I believe in a socially just society… these welfare reforms are the complete opposite of that”. Leishman, who is a member of the Socialist Campaign Group, explained that these reforms are the equivalent of a return to austerity. “We’ve seen a country over the last 14 years that has been ravaged by austerity” he said, “people are still getting poorer. We have to do something different now.”
Leishman has been a vocal critic of the welfare cuts since their announcement; but his decision not to vote for them runs deeper than simply opposition to the policy. In July 2024, as a fresh-faced MP, Leishman voted for the Winter Fuel Payment cut, a decision he deeply regrets (“I was in tears after the vote”, he told me). Dealing with the aftermath of that decision, and following the government’s subsequent U-turn, Leishman explained he doesn’t want to find himself in that position again; forced to vote against his conscience. It is a sentiment that many of his fellow MPs share. “It’s certainly not my personal politics,” Leishman said of the cuts, “and I was speaking with parliamentary colleagues in the PLP (Parliamentary Labour Party) and there’s a lot of people that feel the exact same as me.”
The government is spooked by such a large mobilisation of back-bench MPs. The 108 who have put their names to Hillier’s amendment account for just over a quarter of the party’s MPs. And that’s doesn’t account for the MPs who may still yet vote for it. The number of Labour signatures on the amendment would be sufficient to defeat the government, so long as opposition parties also vote against the reforms (as they are expected to do).
Rumours have begun to swirl that the government may drop Kendall’s welfare reforms altogether; yet another U-turn after a month of successive policy losses (on the Winter Fuel Payment, the two-child benefit cap, the grooming gangs inquiry). Equally, if a vote on the bill does go ahead, the government will likely suffer through a heavy and embarrassing rebellion, which could lead to an eventual loss. Whatever happens, it wasn’t hard to see this coming. MPs have been publicly voicing their concern over these changes ever since they were introduced by Kendall in March. This afternoon, Labour MPs said government figures have begun ringing round rebels telling them that this vote will be a confidence matter and if it goes the rebels’ way, will bring down Starmer. Some of the 108 are due to meet with ministers this afternoon. This is all starting to look very serious. So perhaps this is a warning to Starmer – listening to Labour backbenchers is essential, even the new intake won’t back the government to the hilt anymore.
[See more: The British left will not follow Trump into war]
Content from our partners
Related
