Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Welfare spending to rise by £73.2bn to £406.2bn

1000 replies

topicalaffair · 23/01/2026 14:25

Over the next five years, the OBR is forecasting that UK welfare spending will rise by £73.2bn to £406.2bn.

How does everyone feel about this? I’m livid because I pay lots of tax. I don’t mind paying tax to maintain a civilised society - but this? This is surely taking the piss and will result in weaker and weaker services as the amount of £ available reduces day by day.

YANBU - it’s totally deranged. The every growing uk population can’t function effectively on such a benefits for all basis.

YABU - this welfare spending bill is truly representative of need.

Welfare spending to rise by £73.2bn to £406.2bn
OP posts:
Thread gallery
9
Badacrowe · 23/01/2026 15:00

So does this include in work benefits?
If so then maybe if employers paid an actual living wage, one that doesn’t need topping up, and contributes to their company profits totally from their business and not via the taxpayer that might help.

Although pensions are categorised as a benefit I don’t think that’s right. Everyone who lives long enough reaches a stage where work is no longer realistic. Because of that, income in old age is a necessity not a form of charity. The UKs pension is not generous compared to many other countries. Humans age and there comes a time when you cannot work so what are pensioners meant to do, get a job or something. Having said that, I think public sector pensions need to be addressed as they really seem over generous and perhaps no longer affordable in their present form.

Lack of social housing (blame Thatcher and then all successive governments), high uncontrolled rents (who actually benefits from that? Private housing providers).

So it’s not just individuals who receive benefits, many make money off the back of them. So it’s not right as ever to demonise people who are sick, old or disabled.

Finally, when people say “surely many on benefits could get a job, with adaptations, etc”. Well yes, perhaps some, but it requires the employer AND colleagues to take on the person in the first place, and not whinge when X person isn’t always able to give advance notice of a flare up of a condition, etc. Be honest, how many times have I read about colleagues moaning that someone else is getting special privileges. It’s not so straightforward as it sounds.

Playingvideogames · 23/01/2026 15:00

Dullmary · 23/01/2026 14:59

I don’t mean someone who earns 100k, I mean the billionaires.

🙄

Which billionaires and how would you tax them?

MNLurker1345 · 23/01/2026 15:00

Dullmary · 23/01/2026 14:39

Wouldn’t have to happen if they taxed the rich.

Stop with the tax the rich! The rich pay a lot of tax, just do a little research, inform yourself!
The top earners already pay a disproportionate share of income tax, a fact that’s easy to verify from HMRC data.

The largest % of the welfare bill relates to pensions. Next, is in work benefits and disability.

We don’t have enough young workers and a constantly growing older population. Who deserve their pensions. The sustainability of Triple lock is a valid and much needed debate.

Diminishing % of younger workforce and low productivity and growth results in a smaller tax take!

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:00

No out of work benefits for under 25s

This really won’t be saving much

Penelope23145 · 23/01/2026 15:01

MidnightPatrol · 23/01/2026 14:38

It’s unsustainable, and the whole thing is going to collapse at some point.

Countless challenges to address that no one is brave enough to do anything about - and a dwindling population of working adults and children being born.

People have completely unrealistic expectations of what the government can deliver vs how much tax they’re willing to pay.

I agree with this.
I work in this area, helping people to claim and it really is out of control. I help people over the age of 50. I honestly think there needs to be a big reset when they look at who is eligible. I know labour tried to do this and had to back down but I think something needs to be done as a matter of urgency.
There are a lot of people in their 50's and 60's with health conditions and they keep pushing the pension age back so more and more need to claim. Add into this huge numbers of kids and young people with SEN, the numbers are huge.
Over two thirds of people who go through the work capability assessment for either Universal credit or ESA get awarded the highest group meaning that the ESA either continues indefinitely or the UC increases significantly ( although this is changing from April ). they are so far behind with re-assessments because they are prioritizing new claimants that people barely get re-assessed for years.
Two child cap is lifting in ? April so huge increases there.
Increasing numbers of people becoming unemployed and large numbers of young people out of work.
Huge numbers of pensioners claiming Attendance Allowance and all the additional Pension credits that can go with that. Not to mention the costs of social care. If I quoted some of the figures for the amounts of pension credit that some couples get when both are on Attendance allowance and claiming to be carers for each other I'm sure people would not believe me !
So many couples where both claiming disability benefits, so many families where no-one is working.
Of course the bill is only going one way unless someone takes urgent action ! What that should be I don't know but it is unsustainable.

Playingvideogames · 23/01/2026 15:01

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:00

No out of work benefits for under 25s

This really won’t be saving much

Yes it would.

We have nearly a million NEETs.

1apenny2apenny · 23/01/2026 15:01

The public need to be given broken down facts that can be understood - not just bog numbers.

The largest portion is the state pension however the majority have paid in for this. I KNOW that it’s the current tax payers that fund it now but the state pension is basically a contributory benefit whereas many of the other welfare benefits aren’t.

Personally I think we’ve reached break point, the working tax payers (especially those paying higher rate tax) have no more to give. There needs to be reform within the welfare system however I think Labour will bottle it again.

TheatreTheatre · 23/01/2026 15:01

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 14:36

Is it to do with the rising costs of pensions and the triple lock?

But the triple lock only locks pensions into other indices of people’s income.

I am a (NOT wealthy ) pensioner now and have worked my entire life except when at Uni (when I worked through all the holidays) and never received any benefits except child benefit and statutory maternity.

I was in a low paid sector. No one got UC or formerly tax credit top ups. No one got free childcare hours. No one got early years FSM.

Now families can’t manage without these things. Costs, especially housing whether rent or mortgages, have risen exponentially against wages, as far as I can see. Also food, energy, any form of labour such as for home maintenance etc.

And those costs affect pensioners too. One in 6 pensioners live in poverty. Maintaining a home on a single pension, paying all the overheads less 25% of council tax, is expensive. Pensions need to keep pace!

But so do all salaries and wages.

I fear for young people in a world of AI and other factors affecting job prospects.

It’s a far wider issue than ‘blame the pensions’.

What would be the solution to that? Statutory Euthanasia at 75 or 80?

rereturner · 23/01/2026 15:02

SnipSnipMrBurgess · 23/01/2026 14:57

The point is there is no work! You cant force people into companies that dont want them. So dont concentrate on getting people with disabilities ready for work, concentrate on the companies who refuse to hire!

It’s not even just an issue about companies not wanting them (although lack of education about supporting people with disabilities into work certainly plays a part)

It can cost a company tens of thousands of pounds to make adjustments required in some situations, as well as training/awareness for existing colleagues and ways of working.

I absolutely feel this is a great investment but it’s a bit naive to think that ‘just make them go to work’ is a solution to complex financial issues regarding welfare, work, disabilities etc.

misscockerspaniel · 23/01/2026 15:02

Ablondiebutagoody · 23/01/2026 14:48

I think it's a fucking joke but Labour (prob Tories too) were always going to do that. The working population and business cannot continue to fund so many freeloaders. It's crippling the country and killing growth.

If Reform commit to slashing welfare, they have my vote at the next GE.

You do realise that Farage is Trump's biggest supporter?

Playingvideogames · 23/01/2026 15:02

Penelope23145 · 23/01/2026 15:01

I agree with this.
I work in this area, helping people to claim and it really is out of control. I help people over the age of 50. I honestly think there needs to be a big reset when they look at who is eligible. I know labour tried to do this and had to back down but I think something needs to be done as a matter of urgency.
There are a lot of people in their 50's and 60's with health conditions and they keep pushing the pension age back so more and more need to claim. Add into this huge numbers of kids and young people with SEN, the numbers are huge.
Over two thirds of people who go through the work capability assessment for either Universal credit or ESA get awarded the highest group meaning that the ESA either continues indefinitely or the UC increases significantly ( although this is changing from April ). they are so far behind with re-assessments because they are prioritizing new claimants that people barely get re-assessed for years.
Two child cap is lifting in ? April so huge increases there.
Increasing numbers of people becoming unemployed and large numbers of young people out of work.
Huge numbers of pensioners claiming Attendance Allowance and all the additional Pension credits that can go with that. Not to mention the costs of social care. If I quoted some of the figures for the amounts of pension credit that some couples get when both are on Attendance allowance and claiming to be carers for each other I'm sure people would not believe me !
So many couples where both claiming disability benefits, so many families where no-one is working.
Of course the bill is only going one way unless someone takes urgent action ! What that should be I don't know but it is unsustainable.

Edited

👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:02

Although pensions are categorised as a benefit I don’t think that’s right

I don’t understand this thinking as tax payers are paying it.

Ablondiebutagoody · 23/01/2026 15:02

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 14:55

@Ablondiebutagoody you are aware the biggest spend is on pensioners?

Yes. The rest of the welfare budget is going to have some heavy lifting to do.

topicalaffair · 23/01/2026 15:03

Dullmary · 23/01/2026 14:39

Wouldn’t have to happen if they taxed the rich.

How do you define rich?

Do you think the rich (whoever they are) would stick around if they were uber taxed and no one else was?

OP posts:
bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:03

@Playingvideogames how much is spent on out of work benefits for the under 25s?

EasternStandard · 23/01/2026 15:03

Playingvideogames · 23/01/2026 14:58

Cuts or borrowing.

Has to be one of the 2.

And then nightmare starts again 🤷‍♀️

Can’t be borrowing surely, we’re spending over £100bn in debt servicing a year which could go to that welfare or defence etc

MargotMoon · 23/01/2026 15:04

What should we do? Euthanise pensioners? Evict people who can’t cover their rent on their wages? Leave people with disabilities without transport?

Maybe instead we could tax the rich, introduce rent controls, and improve work opportunities.

CloakedInGucci · 23/01/2026 15:04

DogsbodyHumanHead · 23/01/2026 14:57

Typical @topicalaffair - you believe the first thing you see that agrees with your own views and make no effort to check anything out. This is the problem with this country - it's going the same way as the US and look who they ended up with in charge of their country.

Summary

  • The OBR did not forecast welfare spending rising from £73.2bn to £406.2bn.
  • Official OBR numbers show welfare rising from £313bn to £373bn over five years.
  • “Welfare” is a broad category dominated by the State Pension; narrower definitions can cause confusion.
  • The £406bn figure appears to be a misinterpretation or miscommunication rather than a real OBR forecast.
  1. *How accurate is the claim that the OBR “forecast” welfare spending rising from £73.2bn to £406.2bn?*
Nothing in the OBR’s November 2025 Economic and Fiscal Outlook resembles a forecast of welfare spending rising from £73.2bn to £406.2bn. The OBR’s published figures show something very different:
  • Total UK welfare spending in 2024/25 was forecast at £313.0bn.
  • Total welfare spending in 2029/30 was forecast at £373.4bn.
These are the official numbers. They are nowhere near £406bn, and the baseline is nowhere near £73bn. So where could £73.2bn → £406.2bn come from? There are a few possibilities: a) It may refer to a subset of welfare spending, not total welfare. The OBR breaks welfare into dozens of categories (pensions, disability benefits, UC, housing benefit, child benefit, etc.). Some individual lines can show large percentage changes if a policy change shifts costs between categories. But no major welfare line starts at £73bn and rises to £406bn. b) It may be a misreading of a table showing policy‑driven changes rather than total spending. The OBR often publishes tables showing the change relative to baseline over a multi‑year period. These can contain large cumulative numbers, but they are not forecasts of total spending. c) It may be a misinterpretation of DWP’s “benefit expenditure and caseload tables”. These tables contain many granular lines, but again, no line matches the £73bn → £406bn trajectory. d) It may simply be incorrect. Given the published OBR data, the most likely explanation is that the figure is either misquoted, misinterpreted, or refers to something other than welfare spending.
  1. What does “welfare” actually mean in UK public finance?
“Welfare” is a broad term, and this is where confusion often arises. In UK fiscal reporting: A. The OBR uses “welfare” to mean all social security spending, including:
  • State Pension
  • Pension Credit
  • Universal Credit
  • Disability benefits (PIP, DLA, AA)
  • Housing Benefit
  • Child Benefit
  • Carer’s Allowance
  • Statutory payments (maternity, sick pay, etc.)
This is why the total is so large (over £300bn). B. Journalists and politicians often use “welfare” to mean only working‑age benefits. This excludes the State Pension, which is by far the largest single item. C. The public often thinks “welfare” means only out‑of‑work benefits. This is the smallest definition and the source of most confusion. The key point: Nearly half of all “welfare” spending is the State Pension. This is why the OBR’s total welfare figure is over £300bn, not £70bn.
  1. How meaningful is the £406bn figure?
Given the official OBR forecasts, the £406bn number is not meaningful as a description of total welfare spending.
  • The OBR’s actual forecast for 2029/30 is £373.4bn, not £406bn.
  • The baseline is £313bn, not £73bn.
  • No OBR table shows a rise from £73bn to £406bn.
Unless Peston was referring to a very narrow and unusual subset of welfare spending—and even then the numbers look implausible—the figure does not reflect the OBR’s published forecasts.
  1. Why welfare spending is rising (according to the OBR)
The OBR attributes the rise to:
  • An ageing population (more pensioners)
  • Rising disability and health‑related benefit caseloads
  • Demographic pressures on UC and housing support
These drivers are explicitly discussed in the OBR’s November 2025 outlook.

Can MN ban long answers just pasted from ChatGPT?

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:04

But the triple lock only locks pensions into other indices of people’s income

That was the idea but there is too much intergenerational inequality now.

Cappuccinodelight · 23/01/2026 15:07

Playingvideogames · 23/01/2026 14:56

No out of work benefits for under 25s.

Benefits destroy lives. I see it time and time again at work.

Person leaves school.
They get a part time, low paid job for a few years. Eventually leave or get sacked.
Sign on. They’re living with family so the £500 a month is just pocket money.
Spend it all on takeaways, vapes, weed and rubbish. Spend all day in bed gaming or hanging out with other unemployed mates.
After a few years of this all work ethic and energy is gone, replaced by laziness and low level addiction.
Due to low level addiction and never doing anything remotely healthy, they develop MH ‘issues’, get a diagnosis, and hop on to ESA or PIP. More money for rubbish.
After 10+ years, they’re completely unemployable, their brains are addled, they barely know what day of the week it is. Ricocheting from one ‘support service’ to another. They have kids, who also ‘need support’ as they’re neglected.

What would’ve happened had we not given the benefits to start with?

Edited

No out of work benefits for under 25s

Spot on. Benefits should only be paid to those who have contributed. They should not be a lifestyle choice.

This applies to pension credit which should be phased out.

Jan1205 · 23/01/2026 15:07

This is largely due to pension spending and the triple lock. We need to ditch the triple lock and if we’re being realistic then state pension needs to be reduced and become means tested.

the best thing this government could do for the economy would be to give big incentives to save into a private pension (eg remove the iht inclusion, give tax breaks) and at the same time ditch the state pension. They could bring this policy in for say, under 30s, in order to give people ample time to adjust and prepare.

they never will do this, due to the public outcry, but that’s what I personally feel they should do

topicalaffair · 23/01/2026 15:09

feellikeanalien · 23/01/2026 14:53

The pension age is rising all the time and there are going to be more and more people required to work until almost 70 . It stands to reason that more and more of them will be claiming sickness benefits.

As others have also said the lack of affordable rentals , wages not keeping up with prices and inflation and the fact that it is becoming harder and harder to find employment all adds to this.

All this talk of supporting people back into work is all very well but where are the jobs going to come from? If employers have a choice do you really think they will choose someone who needs extra support over someone who doesn't?

I suspect what will actually happen is that eventually it will become more and more difficult to claim benefits but without the corresponding help to work for those who are no longer eligible.

I dont know what the answer is but I think in all areas of government there needs to be more long term thinking and cross party co-operation. Unfortunately with the way politics is at the moment that seems highly unlikely.

I do have skin in the game as I have DD who is very unlikely ever to be able to work. I am quite frankly terrified for her future especially when I am no longer here to advocate for her.

I dont know what the answer is but I think in all areas of government there needs to be more long term thinking and cross party co-operation. Unfortunately with the way politics is at the moment that seems highly unlikely.

Cross party cooperation would help wouldn’t it, agree. As if though - they’re all too self interested.

OP posts:
bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:09

The largest portion is the state pension however the majority have paid in for this. I KNOW that it’s the current tax payers that fund it now but the state pension is basically a contributory benefit whereas many of the other welfare benefits aren’t.

Realistically people have not paid enough tax for their state pension, healthcare and education. You would have to be a higher rate tax payer for all of your career, most people aren’t.

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:09

And I forgot social care.

Badacrowe · 23/01/2026 15:11

bathsmat · 23/01/2026 15:02

Although pensions are categorised as a benefit I don’t think that’s right

I don’t understand this thinking as tax payers are paying it.

State pension isn’t a handout it’s the continuation of an income after work ends. Taxation pays for more than benefits!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread