Share this post:
Labour MPs have taken their government’s U-turn on winter fuel payments as an opportunity to protest against plans to cut disability support and the two-child benefit cap.
If you think that is a good idea, you haven’t been paying attention. The operative question to ask is: is it too late?
And the answer, if you ask anyone familiar with the budget timeline, is yes.
The Treasury’s spending review — the document that sets the government’s financial direction — is due to be published on Wednesday, June 11 – tomorrow, at the time of writing. And according to sources, it has already been finalised.
So when Labour MPs like Imran Hussain, Nadia Whittome, Rebecca Long-Bailey, and Rachael Maskell stood up in Parliament to demand change, they were speaking after the key decisions had been made.
They are trying to slam shut the barn door, as it were — but the horse has long since bolted.
Five books are gone – 45 to go!
Just click on the image, make your donation
and provide your details!
A timid rebellion?
The winter fuel U-turn has created political space — and perhaps pressure — for wider changes.
After last year’s cut left more than 10 million pensioners out in the cold – or rather, in the cold while still in their homes, the government has now restored payments of up to £300 for those with incomes under £35,000.
That decision was welcomed across the Labour backbenches, especially by MPs who had been privately fuming over the original move.
But this apparent “win” only underscores how much hasn’t been addressed.
Proposals to slash the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) for people with less severe conditions are still very much on the table, being sold as part of a push to “help more people into work” — a phrase that has, for many disabled people, become a euphemism for benefit denial.
Let’s all bear in mind that PIP supports disabled people in paying the extra costs of living with their disability – whether they are in work or not. It is not an out-of-work benefit, nor does receipt of it stop people from taking a job.
Backbenchers are now scrambling to express concern. Rachael Maskell, one of the few MPs to raise these issues consistently, put it bluntly: “You can’t rob disabled people in order to pay older people — that doesn’t make sense.”
But if this outrage is sincere, why has it been so slow to emerge?
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
PIP cuts: a false economy
The government argues the PIP reforms will save £4.8 billion by 2029/30.
That figure has been widely repeated — including by the BBC — but it rests on shaky ground.
Expert analysis suggests the savings may not materialise at all. Instead, the cuts are likely to shift the burden onto other systems: the NHS, social care, unpaid carers, and emergency support services.
In other words, it’s not a saving — it’s a cost shuffle.
So why is Labour pressing ahead?
Treasury and DWP ministers like Torsten Bell talk of reducing “unsustainable” caseloads — noting that 1,000 people a day are moving onto PIP — but they offer little evidence that the current criteria are too loose, or that those in receipt aren’t in genuine need.
Disability campaigners say this rhetoric is dangerously close to demonisation – and they’re not alone.
Get my free guide: “10 Political Lies You Were Sold This Decade” — just subscribe to our email list here:
👉 https://voxpoliticalonline.com
The two-child cap: moral failure, missed opportunity
Equally troubling is the silence — until now — on the two-child benefit cap.
Introduced by the Conservatives in 2017, this policy penalises families for having a third child, regardless of circumstance.
It has been repeatedly linked to rising child poverty.
But Labour’s leadership has refused to commit to scrapping it.
Now, with the local election backlash fresh in MPs’ minds, calls to rethink the policy are growing louder.
But again, with the budget already locked in and decisions delayed until the autumn’s child poverty strategy, the calls risk sounding performative rather than persuasive.
Even when pressed in the Commons, ministers offered only vague assurances that “all levers are on the table”.
That’s not a promise — it’s a placeholder.
What are Labour’s values now?
Labour came to power promising fairness, dignity, and decency.
Now its backbenchers find themselves in a position where they are having to plead — at the 11th hour — for their government to stop targeting some of society’s most vulnerable.
It’s a jarring contradiction.
On the one hand, Labour rightly reversed an unpopular and regressive pension policy. On the other, it remains poised to inflict hardship on disabled people and poor families with more than two children.
This doesn’t look like a coherent moral vision.
It looks like a government improvising its values based on polling — or panic.
Five books are gone – 45 to go!
Just click on the image, make your donation
and provide your details!
Damage control isn’t leadership
Yes, the winter fuel climbdown was necessary.
But it came only after pressure from charities, unions, opposition parties, and backbench MPs — and only after a wave of negative headlines and real human suffering.
If Labour now wants to prove it’s more than just a caretaker for Conservative-era cruelty, it needs to act before the damage is done — not after.
Otherwise, the message is clear: this is a government more willing to apologise than to prevent.
And that’s not leadership.
That’s firefighting.
Share this post:
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
Labour MPs protesting cuts are fixing the barn door after the horse has bolted
Share this post:
Labour MPs have taken their government’s U-turn on winter fuel payments as an opportunity to protest against plans to cut disability support and the two-child benefit cap.
If you think that is a good idea, you haven’t been paying attention. The operative question to ask is: is it too late?
And the answer, if you ask anyone familiar with the budget timeline, is yes.
The Treasury’s spending review — the document that sets the government’s financial direction — is due to be published on Wednesday, June 11 – tomorrow, at the time of writing. And according to sources, it has already been finalised.
So when Labour MPs like Imran Hussain, Nadia Whittome, Rebecca Long-Bailey, and Rachael Maskell stood up in Parliament to demand change, they were speaking after the key decisions had been made.
They are trying to slam shut the barn door, as it were — but the horse has long since bolted.
Five books are gone – 45 to go!
Just click on the image, make your donation
and provide your details!
A timid rebellion?
The winter fuel U-turn has created political space — and perhaps pressure — for wider changes.
After last year’s cut left more than 10 million pensioners out in the cold – or rather, in the cold while still in their homes, the government has now restored payments of up to £300 for those with incomes under £35,000.
That decision was welcomed across the Labour backbenches, especially by MPs who had been privately fuming over the original move.
But this apparent “win” only underscores how much hasn’t been addressed.
Proposals to slash the Personal Independence Payment (PIP) for people with less severe conditions are still very much on the table, being sold as part of a push to “help more people into work” — a phrase that has, for many disabled people, become a euphemism for benefit denial.
Let’s all bear in mind that PIP supports disabled people in paying the extra costs of living with their disability – whether they are in work or not. It is not an out-of-work benefit, nor does receipt of it stop people from taking a job.
Backbenchers are now scrambling to express concern. Rachael Maskell, one of the few MPs to raise these issues consistently, put it bluntly: “You can’t rob disabled people in order to pay older people — that doesn’t make sense.”
But if this outrage is sincere, why has it been so slow to emerge?
Buy Cruel Britannia in print here. Buy the Cruel Britannia ebook here. Or just click on the image!
PIP cuts: a false economy
The government argues the PIP reforms will save £4.8 billion by 2029/30.
That figure has been widely repeated — including by the BBC — but it rests on shaky ground.
Expert analysis suggests the savings may not materialise at all. Instead, the cuts are likely to shift the burden onto other systems: the NHS, social care, unpaid carers, and emergency support services.
In other words, it’s not a saving — it’s a cost shuffle.
So why is Labour pressing ahead?
Treasury and DWP ministers like Torsten Bell talk of reducing “unsustainable” caseloads — noting that 1,000 people a day are moving onto PIP — but they offer little evidence that the current criteria are too loose, or that those in receipt aren’t in genuine need.
Disability campaigners say this rhetoric is dangerously close to demonisation – and they’re not alone.
Get my free guide: “10 Political Lies You Were Sold This Decade” — just subscribe to our email list here:
👉 https://voxpoliticalonline.com
The two-child cap: moral failure, missed opportunity
Equally troubling is the silence — until now — on the two-child benefit cap.
Introduced by the Conservatives in 2017, this policy penalises families for having a third child, regardless of circumstance.
It has been repeatedly linked to rising child poverty.
But Labour’s leadership has refused to commit to scrapping it.
Now, with the local election backlash fresh in MPs’ minds, calls to rethink the policy are growing louder.
But again, with the budget already locked in and decisions delayed until the autumn’s child poverty strategy, the calls risk sounding performative rather than persuasive.
Even when pressed in the Commons, ministers offered only vague assurances that “all levers are on the table”.
That’s not a promise — it’s a placeholder.
What are Labour’s values now?
Labour came to power promising fairness, dignity, and decency.
Now its backbenchers find themselves in a position where they are having to plead — at the 11th hour — for their government to stop targeting some of society’s most vulnerable.
It’s a jarring contradiction.
On the one hand, Labour rightly reversed an unpopular and regressive pension policy. On the other, it remains poised to inflict hardship on disabled people and poor families with more than two children.
This doesn’t look like a coherent moral vision.
It looks like a government improvising its values based on polling — or panic.
Five books are gone – 45 to go!
Just click on the image, make your donation
and provide your details!
Damage control isn’t leadership
Yes, the winter fuel climbdown was necessary.
But it came only after pressure from charities, unions, opposition parties, and backbench MPs — and only after a wave of negative headlines and real human suffering.
If Labour now wants to prove it’s more than just a caretaker for Conservative-era cruelty, it needs to act before the damage is done — not after.
Otherwise, the message is clear: this is a government more willing to apologise than to prevent.
And that’s not leadership.
That’s firefighting.
Share this post:
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:
1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (bottom right of the home page). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.
2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical
3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com
5) Follow Vox Political writer Mike Sivier on BlueSky
6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical
7) Feel free to comment!
And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Cruel Britannia is available
in either print or eBook format here:
The Livingstone Presumption is available
in either print or eBook format here:
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:
you might also like
Let’s start the New Year with some hopeful news
More mistakes in the script? Correcting Cameron’s New Year speech
Michael Gove highlights his own lies; Tony Robinson is right