UK If Starmer doesn’t start sacking his rebellious MPs, they’ll sack him

[Social Media]

 

Sir Keir Starmer’s grip on power is increasingly under pressure as Labour backbenchers grow bolder in their opposition to welfare reforms. If the Prime Minister continues to avoid disciplining his rebellious MPs, the danger is not only policy paralysis—but the potential unravelling of his own authority.

 

Labour MPs angry over the party’s refusal to abolish the two-child benefit cap may want to look inward. The ongoing expansion of the benefits system, driven by surging claims and spiralling costs, has reached an inflection point. Every day, around 1,000 new sickness benefit claims are submitted. Since the Covid lockdowns, an additional 660,000 people have declared themselves too ill to work. From November 2019 to now, the number of working-age adults claiming disability has soared by 50 percent.

 

Meanwhile, Universal Credit claims requiring little or no effort to find employment have ballooned. From 2.6 million in 2019–2020, the number rose to 3.5 million by 2024–2025. This is not just a momentary spike—it’s the sign of a system buckling under strain. In an era when “crisis” is often thrown around casually, the crisis in welfare spending is both real and urgent. The current trajectory is, quite simply, unaffordable.

 

Ordinary families dealing with financial challenges typically look for ways to reduce spending. Labour MPs, by contrast, appear committed to opposing any measure that might limit the state’s payouts—even modest proposals aimed at putting the welfare state on sustainable footing. Last week, their opposition sank a restrained attempt at reform. Now, they are pushing for an outright increase in spending by targeting the two-child benefit cap.

 

The arguments for abolishing the cap are not without merit. Around 1.6 million children are affected by the restriction. But the financial reality cannot be ignored: eliminating the cap would cost at least £3.5 billion a year. That figure dwarfs any savings Labour might have salvaged from the scrapped welfare reform bill.

 

And yet, Labour MPs seem unwilling to entertain the idea that a functioning welfare state must be based on tough trade-offs. The party once celebrated for its reputation for fiscal responsibility under Gordon Brown and Tony Blair now seems unrecognisable. The desire to signal compassion appears to outweigh any concern for affordability. There’s scarcely a taxpayer-funded program Labour MPs won’t defend—particularly if doing so earns them favour in their constituencies.

 

But this short-term political calculus risks enormous long-term damage. A system that pays generous out-of-work benefits indefinitely is not financially viable. The government’s stated priority is economic growth. That ambition must be coupled with a serious effort to reduce the explosion in disability claims. Imagine a Britain where the population is getting healthier each year and contributing more in taxes than it draws in benefits. Sadly, that’s a fantasy in today’s climate.

 

Labour, it seems, is content to watch benefit costs rise. Worse, it is actively encouraging that rise. The pandemic is the favored justification, but the argument wears thin. Covid was disruptive, yes—but it doesn’t explain why so many are still on long-term benefits years later, particularly when most recovered fully and society has long since reopened.

 

Emboldened by their recent success, Labour’s backbenchers may seize the next big moment: the Budget. “Rachel Reeves is hardly seen as the ‘iron chancellor’ of her generation,” the article notes, “and neither is Keir Starmer the kind of Prime Minister who is ‘not for turning’.” If they sense weakness, MPs may force a showdown. No Budget has been defeated in modern parliamentary history—but in this volatile mix of rebellious MPs, economic hardship, and wavering leadership, 2025 could deliver just such a political earthquake.

 

If Starmer continues to placate rather than lead, he may soon find himself the victim of the very same MPs he now refuses to discipline.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Telegraph  2025-07-12

 

 

[ukrules]

It's nowhere near as easy to replace a Labour party PM as it is a Conservative one - they're wise to that trick and always have been

In fact their system appears to be designed to make it nearly impossible to do. I can't remember the details but it's up to the party rules to choose a new Prime Minister.