Benefits Bill Will Rise by £8 Billion Even if Starmer Defeats Rebels, Warns IFS
Britain’s benefits bill will rise by a further £8 billion even if Sir Keir Starmer defeats Labour rebels on his flagship welfare reforms, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has warned. The Telegraph has the story.
Spending on health-related benefits for working-age adults is expected to hit £61 billion by the end of the decade, the analysts said, regardless of the Prime Minister’s planned cuts.
This is up from £36 billion in 2019-20, reflecting the surge in welfare claims post-Covid.
Without the reforms, the IFS said the welfare bill would be on track to reach £66 billion.
This latest analysis highlights how Sir Keir’s planned welfare cuts, which have provoked a mass rebellion from Left-wing MPs, will do little to stem the growth of Britain’s benefits costs.
As part of its research, the IFS found that the number of people claiming disability benefits is also set to surge from 3.1 million to 3.9 million by 2030, despite efforts to tighten up the criteria.
Stricter rules are set to include toughening up eligibility requirements for personal independent payments (PIP) and limiting health-related top-up instalments for Universal Credit.
Not really a cut, then, more a slightly slower rise.
Labour MPs are clearly furious with Starmer as there’s a serious danger defeating the Government on these (very modest) reforms could bring the son-of-a-toolmaker down. An outcome I suspect many would welcome.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It seems to me as if the Labour MPs resisting benefits cuts are on this occasion at least representing the wishes of their constituents.
Unless I’m completely misreading the mood of the public, I don’t think too many people want benefits or really any form of state services, like the NHS, reduced.
The only area where I think there is support for reducing most if not all benefits is to immigrants.
Other than that, the population generally are in favour of taxing the productive part of society and giving it to the less productive.
I think that is largely true though I suspect the results of an opinion poll would correlate strongly with whether the person was part of the productive or the unproductive side
Here is the kicker. I 100% guarantee that many people who think they are productive – i.e. contribute more than they receive – are not.
Possibly. I think “productive” is probably a difficult thing to pin down and views will vary. I work in the private sector and our clients are private sector businesses so I guess the market is determining my worth, but I often feel puzzled by how much I get paid compared to others, especially people who do things like designing cars and aeroplanes.
Saw a stat yesterday that around 200 Labour MP’s have a majority smaller than the number of PIP claimants in their constituency.
To correct your last remark…
Other than that, the less productive part of the population generally are in favour of taxing the productive part of society and giving it to themselves.
To be honest, you’ve caught me out on my knowledge of benefits. I literally have no idea about any of the different kinds of benefits available. To me pretty much everything that the state gives out to individuals with money they confiscate from the population is a benefit. That’s probably the wrong word, though.
I’m pretty sure that the majority of Labour voters receive some sort of “service” or benefit from the state. Crappy rationed healthcare for one. Pensions. Unemployment benefits. Income support.
The question to always ask people, even those with modest homes and jobs is:- should those with millions be taxed more to pay for the NHS and benefits. If the answer is yes, then ask if all the wealthy have left or have had their wealth taxed off them, should people who own a £500,000 house be taxed more? Just keep going down the value and eventually they get the idea that a Government that starts taxing those with assets quickly goes down the scale because they run out of people each time.
“I don’t think too many people want benefits or really any form of state services…”
Of course not! The greed runs deep – the belief that you have a right to other people’s money to be used for your own purposes and benefit.
It’s called Socialism or Social Justice but that’s just camouflage for greed, rotten greed, and envy that others have more than you, spite, they deserve to have it taken away from them.
What a wonderful bunch of folks we are.
If Starmer goes, i hope the Chagos deal won’t get ratified, the train drivers get a pay cut, and all illegals get deported.
ooh look! a flock of pigs just took off.
You will be poor.
You will own nothing.
You will be happy.
All funded by the taxpaying private sector.
Here’s a wild idea. Stop all benefits. Then beware the stampede out of the Country (cultural enhancers) and to the Job Centre (layabouts, scrounges and losers.)
Whilst at it: introduce opt-out from NHS. That is give a tax/NIC deduction equivalent to the annual amount each person in the UK pays via taxation for “our” “free” NHS – about £3 000 in fact – and divert the money to a private insurer of the citizen’s choosing – like it used to be for 75% of the population until the 1911 National Insurance Act which forced individuals to pay into the State scam and destroyed the private insurance market.
Those left in “our” NHS can pay for it.
And whilst at it: let people opt-out of the welfare State with a tax credit to allow them to buy their own unemployment/sickness insurance just like it was for 75% of the population who had private insurance as add-ons to their private health insurance up to the 1911 National Insurance Act.
Those who prefer weflareism can pay for it.
What? Not radical enough?
The weird thing is that it should have been the Tories making the cuts to the most ridiculous welfare benefits for “Mental Health”, like paying people pots of Extra Money, on top of normal help with rent & food, just for insisting that they are “Depressed”, or “Anxious”, or any of the umpteen other types of “Psychological Syndrome”.
Yes, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is a very real thing, especially in the military and emergency services, but I still don’t understand why people are paid extra money for it, when the NHS & social services already provide help with all the things they need.
And Immigration Lawyer Starmer’s Treasonous Legal Case against the government, forcing Taxpayers to lavish money on Fake Refugees, should be OVERTURNED & ABOLISHED.
Those two things alone, plus sacking every Immigration Lawyer & Judge, would save £billions.