The Guardian view on Labour’s welfare plans: betraying the vulnerable | Editorial

A Labour party in power might have been expected to defend the poorest and most vulnerable in society. No longer, it seems. Sir Keir Starmer’s government, inheriting a flatlining economy and self-imposed fiscal constraints, has chosen to balance the books on the backs of disabled people. Naturally, ministers aren’t calling it austerity. That would be so 2010s. Instead, they say these £6bn in cuts to disability benefits will help people back into employment. It’s a noble idea, except for one small problem: the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) says it won’t work.

The OBR’s analysis of the original £3bn welfare cut found that, while 400,000 disabled people would lose nearly £5,000 a year in benefits, only about 3% would actually enter employment. That’s not a welfare-to-work success story – it’s just a crude fiscal exercise dressed up as reform. But rather than rethink its approach, Labour doubled down, seeking another £3bn in savings. And where better to look than the never-implemented Tory proposals to cut benefits from mentally ill, sick and disabled people? Among the ideas being considered are replacing personal independence payment (Pip) with vouchers, freezing benefit rates and cutting mental health support for claimants – all in the name of “fairness to the taxpayer”.

The contradictions in the government’s proposals are impossible to ignore. If disability benefits are meant to support work, how does cutting Pip – taking away funding for mobility aids that keep people working – help? The government wants 2 million more people in work – a laudable goal – but cutting support only makes job-seeking riskier.

The government assumes rising health-related claims are due to a lax welfare system or weak work incentives. But a report for the Institute for Fiscal Studies finds that the surge closely follows rising mental health diagnoses, not a failing benefits system. This is reinforced by the worsening physical health of the working-age population, with deaths from suicide, alcohol and drugs increasing significantly since the pandemic. The UK’s post-pandemic surge in benefit claims is almost unique – most similar countries saw no such rise, suggesting domestic factors at play.

The rhetoric of the welfare secretary, Liz Kendall, has attempted to reconcile these inconsistencies, but ultimately, it exposes the gap between political messaging and economic reality. The cuts are being framed as a crackdown on unfairness, but in practice, they will worsen poverty and undermine employment prospects. Instead of cutting benefits, the government could tackle the disability welfare bill by fixing NHS backlogs, investing in accessible jobs and ensuring claimants can try work without losing support. Instead, it’s spending priorities – not system abuse – that appear to be driving policy.

This is austerity rebranded as reform, except without the Tory bravado. George Osborne at least called it what it was. Sir Keir echoes Conservative rhetoric, signalling an appeal to voters who view Labour as too soft on welfare. This strategy is being shaped by his chancellor Rachel Reeves’s ­self‑imposed fiscal straitjacket and the Blairite politics of his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney. They aren’t unlocking Britain’s economic potential – just flattering themselves that they are. The reality is that the evidence says otherwise. But when the political choice is fiscal prudence or human dignity, this government appears to have made up its mind.

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.