UK Labour Whip Resigns in Protest Against Starmer’s Welfare Reforms

[Social Media]

 

Labour Whip Resigns in Protest Against Starmer’s Welfare Reforms

 

Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft has resigned from her role as a party whip, stating she cannot stand behind welfare reforms proposed by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer that would result in financial losses for disabled people.

 

In a letter addressed directly to Starmer, Foxcroft expressed her opposition to what she described as damaging and unjust changes to the welfare system. “I cannot support reforms which include cuts to disabled people’s finances,” she wrote, making her stance clear in a growing internal dispute within the Labour Party.

BREAKING: Labour MP Vicky Foxcroft has resigned from her post as a government whip over Sir Keir Starmer's plan to cut benefits.

Latest: https://t.co/mqR3CfqsUv

📺 Sky 501, Virgin 602, Freeview 233 pic.twitter.com/vO3SYp4rcM

— Sky News (@SkyNews) June 19, 2025

 

Foxcroft’s resignation comes as tensions continue to rise over a controversial £5 billion-a-year package of proposed savings to the government’s disability and sickness benefits bill. Central to the plan are reductions in the personal independence payment (PIP), a benefit designed to support people with long-term physical or mental health conditions.

 

These measures have sparked the largest rebellion of Starmer’s leadership so far. More than 150 Labour MPs have reportedly signed a private letter voicing their opposition to the planned cuts, underscoring a deepening divide between the party’s leadership and its backbenchers.

 

Despite mounting pressure, the Prime Minister has remained defiant. Over the weekend, he made it clear he was prepared to face down dissent from within his own ranks, emphasizing the necessity of implementing the reforms. “The reforms must be pushed through,” he insisted, signaling his determination to proceed despite the backlash.

 

Specific details of the legislative changes are expected to be laid out later this week, ahead of a crucial parliamentary vote likely to take place before summer recess begins next month. The outcome of that vote may prove to be a defining moment for Starmer’s administration, as he seeks to press forward with a policy that has triggered both political fallout and public controversy.

 

Foxcroft’s departure from the frontbench adds further weight to the growing opposition movement and highlights the difficult balancing act facing Labour’s leadership: reconciling fiscal discipline with social responsibility, while maintaining party unity in the lead-up to a critical vote.

 

Her resignation letter marks a public and pointed rejection of the current direction of Labour policy under Starmer’s leadership, placing further scrutiny on the Prime Minister’s handling of internal dissent and the broader implications of cutting support for vulnerable citizens.

 

The issue of disability benefits reform is fast becoming a litmus test not only for Starmer’s leadership, but for Labour’s core values as a party that has long prided itself on defending the welfare state.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Telegraph  2025-06-21

 

 

[James105]

Well at least it seems that Labour are coming to terms with the fact that you cannot have open borders and a functioning welfare state - you can only have one or the other.   It's a shame that they have decided to continue the open borders policy and do not want to make the savings by deporting foreign nationals who claim benefits and/or defending the borders rather than supporting the British nationals that need welfare, but it is what it is.   

[RayC]

5 hours ago, James105 said:

Well at least it seems that Labour are coming to terms with the fact that you cannot have open borders and a functioning welfare state - you can only have one or the other.

 

If that were the case then the welfare state would have ceased to function while we were a member of the EU.

 

It didn't. 

 

5 hours ago, James105 said:

 

   It's a shame that they have decided to continue the open borders policy and do not want to make the savings by deporting foreign nationals who claim benefits and/or defending the borders rather than supporting the British nationals that need welfare, but it is what it is.   

 

There is no 'open borders policy'; in fact (almost) the exact opposite. Immigration to the UK is more tightly controlled now than at any time since the early '90s as a result of Brexit and the loss of freedom of movement.

[The Cyclist]

3 minutes ago, RayC said:

There is no 'open borders policy'; in fact (almost) the exact opposite. Immigration to the UK is more tightly controlled now than at any time since the early '90s as a result of Brexit and the loss of freedom of movement.

 

 

This says different

 

 

 

the numbers reduced significantly in  2024 due to the Tories cutting family / spouse Visas.

[RayC]

1 minute ago, The Cyclist said:

 

 

This says different

 

 

 

the numbers reduced significantly in  2024 due to the Tories cutting family / spouse Visas.

 

"An open border is a border that enables free movement of people and often of goods between jurisdictions with no restrictions on movement and is lacking a border control" (Wikipedia)

 

By definition, the UK does NOT now have an 'Open Borders policy' as immigration from all countries is subject to conditions being met.

 

As I implied, the UK did have an 'Open Borders policy' (with 27 other nations) when we were a member of the EU, and that at least partially explains the overall increase in immigration numbers between 1990 and 2020. However, as we are obviously no longer an EU member, the increase in numbers since 2020 cannot be attributed to an 'Open Borders' policy.

[The Cyclist]

2 minutes ago, RayC said:

By definition, the UK does NOT now have an 'Open Borders policy' as immigration from all countries is subject to conditions being met.

 

50,000 Dinghy Divers in the last year say otherwise.

 

It might not be " Official Policy "  but it is an open border nonetheless.

[RayC]

5 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

50,000 Dinghy Divers in the last year say otherwise.

 

It might not be " Official Policy "  but it is an open border nonetheless.

 

Governments - both Tory and Labour - have tried to stop illegal immigration.

 

I am talking about legal immigration: A (limited) 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are not mutually exclusive situations.

[The Cyclist]

2 hours ago, RayC said:

Governments - both Tory and Labour - have tried to stop illegal immigration.

 

Have they really ?
 

Rwanda might have work on the deterrent factor, if Lawfare and Labour hadn't stopped it.

 

Labours, Smash the Gangs, is an abject failure.

 

2 hours ago, RayC said:

I am talking about legal immigration: A (limited) 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are not mutually exclusive situations.

 

How can a legal immigration system be working. When 1 million foreigners are paid £7.5 Billion a year in welfare benefits ?
 

These figures do not include Illegal Immigrants.

 

Neither legal migration Policy or the Welfare State Policy is worth the paper that they are written on.

 

Not much in the UK at Government level is worth the paper it is written on, hence the reason the UK is clinging on at the S bend and in danger of flushing down it completely.

[JonnyF]

Someone has to take hit to pay for all the immigrants.

 

He has already taken the fuel allowance from the pensioners and now he is taking welfare from the disabled.

 

He loves to target the weak. No wonder even his own party hate him.  

[RayC]

12 minutes ago, The Cyclist said:

 

Have they really ?
 

Rwanda might have work on the deterrent factor, if Lawfare and Labour hadn't stopped it.

 

Labours, Smash the Gangs, is an abject failure.

 

 

How can a legal immigration system be working. When 1 million foreigners are paid £7.5 Billion a year in welfare benefits ?
 

These figures do not include Illegal Immigrants.

 

Neither legal migration Policy or the Welfare State Policy is worth the paper that they are written on.

 

Not much in the UK at Government level is worth the paper it is written on, hence the reason the UK is clinging on at the S bend and in danger of flushing down it completely.

 

You are obviously perfectly entitled to your opinion, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my points which are: 1) the UK does not operate an 'Open Borders' immigration policy and 2) that there is evidence to suggest that operating an 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are mutually exclusive.

 

[The Cyclist]

10 hours ago, RayC said:

You are obviously perfectly entitled to your opinion, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my points which are:

 

Let's look at your points in a little more detail

 

10 hours ago, RayC said:

1) the UK does not operate an 'Open Borders' immigration policy

 

Whether they operate an " Open Borders Immigration Policy " is neither here nor there.

 

The facts speak for themselves.

 

Legal migration. See graph above.

 

Illegal migration. 20,000 this year already, 50,000 since Labour came to power.

 

Whatever way you want to look at, this is not a " Controlled Border Policy "

 

10 hours ago, RayC said:

2) that there is evidence to suggest that operating an 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are mutually exclusive.

 

We do not have a " Functioning " welfare system. To try and pretend otherwise, is deluded in the extreme.

 

1 million foreigners, claiming £7.5 Billion a year in benefits, tells me that there is something very wrong with both the Immigration Policy and the Welfare Policy.

 

To put that into a bit of perspective.

 

No idea if Thailand has the equivalent of DWP Offices. But I can just imagine the reaction I would get if I rocked up at one and said give me benefits.

 

It would be ID  and deported.

[James105]

11 hours ago, RayC said:

 

You are obviously perfectly entitled to your opinion, but it has absolutely nothing to do with my points which are: 1) the UK does not operate an 'Open Borders' immigration policy and 2) that there is evidence to suggest that operating an 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are mutually exclusive.

 

 

Open borders and a functioning welfare state are indeed mutually exclusive.  Denmark published the figures that the UK are too afraid to admit.  You could probably get away with an open border policy that allowed westerners from western nations to freely move between countries, but that is not what is happening is it?  

 

[JonnyF]

11 hours ago, RayC said:

2) that there is evidence to suggest that operating an 'Open Borders' policy and a functioning Welfare State are mutually exclusive.

 

Classic socialism.

 

Spending other people's money on their vanity projects to appease their white guilt, until it runs out and then being voted out of office. 

 

The evidence is clear. They have stopped pensioners fuel allowance and cut welfare for the disabled while spending billions on immigrants. If they could fund it all they would. 

 

Fortunately they will be a one term government. Like most socialist governments they will do tremendous damage during that one term. 

 

Like Thatcher said. The trouble with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.

 

I'm guessing you were never a huge tax payer though. Recipients of benefits of the welfare state tend to like them more than those who pay for them. 

[billd766]

15 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

 

50,000 Dinghy Divers in the last year say otherwise.

 

It might not be " Official Policy "  but it is an open border nonetheless.

It may however, be part of a "turn a Nelson blind eye" policy.

[blaze master]

12 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Someone has to take hit to pay for all the immigrants.

 

He has already taken the fuel allowance from the pensioners and now he is taking welfare from the disabled.

 

He loves to target the weak. No wonder even his own party hate him.  

 

Cue shadow ...3....2....1

[The Cyclist]

4 hours ago, billd766 said:

It may however, be part of a "turn a Nelson blind eye" policy.

 

That is exactly what it is.

 

Clueless, spineless, gutless, too scared to upset people, poor excuses for human being

 

And that's just Politicians.