Tory Boy Starmer wins through on the back of the disabled

It's almost as if nothing ever actually changes despite those in power "changing". Weird that.

Starmer, Sunak, May, Lettuce, Cameron, Brown, Blair...all the same. Liars, greedy, in the pockets of corporations and billionaires.

Why you all argue the merits and demerits of what is a totally corrupt system from top to bottom is astounding.

 

£1 billion a year will be invested by 2028 to support people back into work – the largest investment of its kind.

£300 million is being spent this year on tailored job and health support for disabled and long-term sick people.

A new “Right to Try” approach will let people test out work without losing their benefits.

Universal Credit will increase above inflation over the next four years, providing around £725 extra a year for a single adult by 2029.

Those affected by changes to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) will have 13-week protections in place.

People with lifelong severe conditions will no longer face repeated reassessments.

The Work Capability Assessment will be scrapped by 2028.

A Youth Guarantee will ensure every 18–21-year-old is either earning or learning.

 

Notice you didn’t mention Farage, who is the worst of the lot and will do anything if it means money in the pockets of himself and his shareholders/donors.

 

I think that's because he was listing Prime Ministers.

 

Why would I? I was listing Prime Ministers. Wasn't that obvious?

That guy must live in your head rent free, honestly.

 

It’s a saddening reflection of current priorities when a Labour government, traditionally seen as a champion of social welfare, seeks to balance its books by tightening support for the most vulnerable. Cuts to essential services for the elderly, disabled, and low-income families signal not just a shift in fiscal policy but a betrayal of values rooted in compassion and solidarity. These communities already face daily struggles, and the removal or reduction of vital assistance only deepens their hardship, often with irreversible consequences.

What compounds this pain is the glaring contrast in spending decisions. Even as the government imposes austerity on those who can least afford it, it somehow manages to locate vast sums for nuclear weapons and military expansion. This stark imbalance raises serious questions about the nation’s moral compass. Rather than investing in care, dignity, and a safety net for all, billions are directed toward instruments of destruction.

It is not just a budgetary decision; it is a political statement about whose lives are valued and whose are expendable. To make matters worse, this same government continues to offer uncritical support to Israel as it carries out devastating actions against the Palestinian people. In doing so, it is complicit in a humanitarian catastrophe, war crimes, genocide, abandoning the principles of justice and international law that it claims to uphold. I knew Labour were heading down this path from the moment Starmer took over, as I stated on here at the time (which irked many of you who argued otherwise) which is why I cancelled my membership. For me, voting Green is the only answer now—they oppose austerity, reject militarism, and stand firmly for human rights at home and abroad.

I sleep soundly at night.

 

This is the root of their problems, something they are too afraid to do, despite the vast majority of people being in favour.

 

Yes, John Tidball

 

That's pretty much the story of the 1st year in Government. It started with them announcing the WFA cut well ahead of the winter statement, which literally gifted fuel to the right wing media, and they've continued to shoot themselves in the foot from a PR perspective ever since.

McSweeney might have been a genius at electoral strategy, but running a government requires a different skillset, and it looks like he doesn't possess it, given how badly Starmer is being advised. Repeatedly making avoidable mistakes is not the signature of a so-called strategic mastermind.

This particular issue has hugely undermined Starmer's core support base within the Party, so it has been damaging for him, despite how they try to spin it from here. Huge political capital to get a watered down bill through a second reading that was changed so late in the day that MPs didn't know what they were actually voting on by the time they went through the lobbies. Epic failure.

 

All these Tories and the 5 Deformists voting against it. Isn't cutting welfare the the flagship policy of the Cons? And as for Deform, they'd literally rather put the disabled in concentration camps.

So it makes me wonder, are the welfare reforms too soft for them, or something? Cos this should've been unanimous in Parliament.

Although I wouldn't have voted for it.

 

https://www.cityam.com/billionaire-exodus-shows-britain-is-no-longer-a-place-for-wealth-to-grow/

Those with the broadest shoulders are leaving. Tax them more and more will leave and the shortfall will have to be made up by people aren't as rich.

 

But they'll stay as long as they don't have to contribute much?

Cheerio!

 

Quite right. Who needs the 28% of tax revenues that the top 1% contribute. We're better off without them! After all, the NHS is flourishing since we locked down to save it. Thank God we did that too! And everyone on here keeps stating how much the economy benefits from net migration levels, so I'm sure it will all be fine.

 

Depends who you believe...https://bylinetimes.com/2025/01/24/...wealth-taxes-wont-force-them-to-leave-either/

 

This one is utterly absurd. A 13 week delay, essentially, until your payments are removed for, in many circumstances, lifelong conditions.

It's an excellent example of why the Welfare Bill was so poorly thought out, and why many MPs had fundamental issues with it.

 

Hmm. Economics from the Jimmy Viz school of "money printer go brrrr"

 

14 years in opposition and they didn't come up with alternative solutions. It's almost as if the new Ministers asked their Civil Servants what policies the Tories were working on and decided to implement these as they didn't have any fresh ideas. You've only got to look at Rachel Reeves' book 'The Women Who Made Modern Economics', alot of it was plagiarised, to realise she doesn't have an original thought in her head. Educated in mainstream economics heavily skewed towards neo-liberal theory she was never going to challenge the status quo. Labour have gone for some of the weakest groups in society, none of them responsible for the clusterf**k that is 21st Century UK.

 

I can categorically state that mental health services are on their knees and getting worse under Labour. As for welfare bill we are middle of the road in European terms don’t believe all the lies they tell.

 

I'd say they are improving in my area. I suffer myself and couldn't get an appointment last year but I've been seen twice since May after being referred in April.

6700 extra mental health workers is a good start but that's all it is.

 

Poverty costs the NHS more than this bill even before the concessions would have saved.

Also, the money given to support the disabled doesn’t just disappear. It is almost always spent pretty quickly and goes straight into the economy, so gutting it has a knock on effect that isn’t taken into account.

It’s a political choice to shaft the vulnerable.