Keir Starmer is facing a tidal wave of fury after dodging questions about whether a Labour government would actually *cut* spending on welfare. Can you believe it?
The Prime Minister declared it his "moral mission" to get people off benefits. Noble, right? But critics are quick to point out he's simultaneously overseen a £16 billion *increase* to the welfare bill.
And the drama doesn't stop there! Labour's Budget is under fire, with accusations that Chancellor Rachel Reeves misled the public about the state of the nation's finances. Ouch!
Even the BBC, bless their unbiased hearts, suggested Reeves wasn't exactly upfront when trying to sell voters on record taxes. Double ouch!
The budget has been brutally dubbed a "Budget for Benefits Street paid for by workers" – thanks to an extra £26 billion in tax hikes largely hitting workers' earnings, while welfare spending balloons.
Starmer, seemingly in damage control, used a post-Budget press conference to vaguely claim he wants to end the "cycle of worklessness and dependency." But actions speak louder than words, right?
He bleated: “That costs the country money, is bad for our productivity, and most importantly of all it is a massive waste of potential.”
The annual welfare bill, brace yourselves, is forecast to jump from a whopping £315 billion *this year* to a truly eye-watering £406 billion in just five years. Is anyone else feeling faint?
During a visit to a London nursery, where he shared a chuckle with a three-year-old, Starmer dodged a direct question from The Sun about pledging to *reduce* welfare spending by the next election. Smooth move, Keir.
Instead, he hid behind the findings of two reviews into disability benefits and youth inactivity, conveniently due to report next year. Talk about kicking the can down the road!
And it wasn't just him. Downing Street also refused to commit to cutting those crippling benefit costs by the end of this Parliament. The silence is deafening!
Did you know that sickness benefit spending alone is on track to exceed £100 billion? It's enough to make you choke on your morning cuppa.
Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride didn't mince words: "It is very clear after Rachel Reeves’ Benefits Budget that we can expect more and more welfare, paid for by hardworking working families." Preach!
Reform UK MP Lee Anderson threw some serious shade: "Time and time again the Government has shown itself to be on the side of the workshy not the hardworking taxpayers... If you’re able-bodied you should be working. No excuses and no out-of-work benefits.”
Remember Starmer's attempt to cut welfare spending by £5 billion earlier this year? Yeah, that was torpedoed by Labour rebels. Internal squabbles, anyone?
When asked if he’d discipline MPs who oppose further welfare cuts, he claimed a "general consensus" exists about a "moral mission" to reform the system. Famous last words!
He even dared to defend his Budget and its £3 billion plan to axe the two-child benefit cap. Talk about sticking to your guns!
Meanwhile, the credibility crisis surrounding Chancellor Reeves is reaching DEFCON 1. A YouGov poll revealed that 60% of voters consider her untrustworthy. Yikes!
Starmer, ever the loyal leader, insisted there was "no misleading" about the public finances. But is anyone buying it?
Senior Tories and Reform UK figures are adamant that voters *were* misled. And an unnamed Cabinet minister claims they were duped too. The plot thickens!
Even the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) suggested Reeves exaggerated the financial black hole. Ouch, again!
The Chancellor, however, claims the borrowing rules didn't account for the costs of welfare reversals. Blame game, anyone?
Go to Home page.