Keir Starmer facing ‘crippling, humiliating’ Labour revolt over PIP cut plan
| Updated:
More than 130 MPs, mostly from Labour, are set to stand against Keir Starmer’s plans to cut Personal Independence Payments, with plans to vote against the bill in the House of Commons. Why are they making this move – and what does it mean for the government?
Listen to this article
Read time: 4 mins
In brief…
- Labour MPs have signed an amendment to bring a vote to the House of Commons over planned PIP cuts, in which they will vote against their own party and the Prime Minister.
- The News Agents say this stems from Labour MPs being morally, and politically, opposed to cutting payments to disadvantaged people.
- The cuts are part of Labour’s goals of reversing a £55 billion ‘fiscal black hole’, but the money that could be saved with this plan would plug only a small fraction of that amount.
What’s the story?
Keir Starmer is heading for a House of Commons showdown with his own backbenchers over his proposed cuts to Personal Independence Payments (PIP).
Labour is seeking to save £5 billion a year by making cuts to the benefit, which is given to certain people to help pay for the additional cost of living with disabilities or other health conditions.
But more than 130 MPs, including at least 120 from Labour, have now signed an amendment to introduce a vote on the proposal, in order to stand against the PIP cuts.
It comes after Starmer reversed a previous policy to cut winter fuel payments for the elderly, which was also met with resistance from both MPs and the public.
At the time he claimed it was due to improvements in the UK economy, following Labour actions since coming to power, and was not a u-turn on policy.
The News Agents say a second reversal would be "humiliating" for Starmer.
Why are some Labour MPs standing against the PIP cuts?
Since Labour's victory in the 2024 general election, Starmer and his cabinet have spoken frequently of the £55 billion "fiscal black hole" it inherited from the previous Tory government – spending without any funding – that it has worked to plug.
But in trying to claw back some of this amount by taking cash from pensioners, and now disabled and disadvantaged people, the government has faced fierce backlash – including from within its own ranks.
"It is an extraordinary moment for Starmer, because once again, he's been put in a position where his own party is saying it doesn't like the policies he's coming up with," says Emily Maitlis.
"They're saying they didn't come into government as Labour MPs to vote to make disabled people poorer."
When Starmer reversed the planned cuts to winter fuel payments, it did little to improve his popularity in the polls, especially with older people it affected.
Lewis Goodall says some Labour MPs feel it "in their bones" that it goes against party principles to take welfare support from people, even if many believe that the case for welfare reform is strong.
"Starmer's response, at this stage, has been to say, it's staying and he's not going to pull this bill," Emily adds.
"It sounds as if the government feels it has to dig its heels in on this, because it can't be seen as one which changes its mind from one month to the next."
Details of the Labour revolt came on the same day Starmer was set to increase UK contributions to NATO to 5% of GDP. The savings made by planned cuts to the PIP payments was estimated to be around £5 billion, while that NATO increase is said to be between £30-40 billion.
What does this mean for Starmer?
With polling suggesting Reform UK would win a general election, if one were held imminently, Starmer desperately needs to solidify his government and its strategy to boost the UK economy and the lives of its people.
But while attempting to cut benefits for some of the most vulnerable in society is damaging to Labour, it might be nothing compared to the embarrassment of losing a Commons vote to its own MPs.
"If the government, with all of its wider fiscal constraints, is struggling to even save £5 billion in the welfare bill – which is projected to go up in the years to come – then you are really struggling to make any kind of fiscal sense," says Lewis.
"If it really looks like they might get defeated on the floor of the House of Commons, that would be so crippling to Starmer's authority, to lose a majority that big over something that they've put great store by.
"It would be humiliating."
Emily says that, for many Labour MPs choosing to side against the PM, they will be considering the long-term legacy their vote in this matter leaves for both them, and the party.
"Any vote can be traced back to you for years and decades to come," she says.
"We are still now looking back over how people voted on Iraq? How the Tories voted on the bedroom tax," she says.
"This could be something that people just don't want on their voting record, because it speaks volumes to the public when they're trying to work out what side of the argument you're on."
Listen to the latest episode of The News Agents.
