What will it take for the Government to enact welfare reform?

[Schlossadler]

What has to break, before the Government is finally willing to enact welfare reform?

But you could say the same re NHS, benefits, and lots of other areas of government. When you have different political parties with very different view points, they really can't work together as they have very little in common.

You could - but on defence specifically other countries manage it in the national interest. Significantly, right now, those who share a border with Russia take this particularly seriously. And military chiefs in our country have long advocated for it.

So Pakistan has already experiencing issues relating to energy shortages
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/energy-disruption-hits-bangladesh-pakistan-gulf-crisis-worsens-2026-09-17/

It has now said markets, shops and malls must close by 9pm, while restaurants can operate until 11pm to conserve fuels and to try and keep government spending down it will cut fuel allowances for official vehicles by 50% for three months, reduce non-salary spending by 5%, suspend vehicle and durable goods purchases, and restrict official foreign travel.

Just a point because of the amount of manufacturing that's shipped to the UK such as textiles. If the factories can't manufacturer they miss deadlines, potentially for orders that have already been paid for. Or orders just aren't fulfilled. This has implications for buyers in the UK.

That's probably not good for the British economy full stop.

I think you just decide to fund defence immediately and properly due to the clear threats we are facing. And not wait until next year. The Conservatives would act now. Labour don't seem to be able to.

Interesting.

Paid for from where?

So does not have the 3rd+ kid they can’t afford in the first place.

Labour can't because the Nation's finances are in a perilous state and the financial markets, from whom we'd have to borrow the money to fund additional defence spending, would punish us with even higher interest rates (we already spend more on interest than on education due to the humungous 3 TRILLION pound national debt!).

Presumably all the money saved by not paying all the other benefits, i.e. disability benefits, housing benefits, state pensions etc., as presumably the £1,000 per person will be a replacement for all other benefits!! Surely they don't think it will be in addition to all the other benefits??

Idk but it sounds like a lot to pay even if it replaces other benefits. Not sure what the overall sum is.

We’ve clearly different life experiences as I’ve never seen that to be the case re employers.

I’ve worked for a number of organisations now can probably approved the hiring of 500+ individuals and can honestly say disability has never been a factor. If anything, the push to ensure we’re doing the right thing and are not discriminating has probably swayed in the favour of disabled candidates over non-disabled candidates, rightly or wrongly.

i sometimes think people think there’s a big bad conspiracy out there when in reality there isn’t. People generally don’t have enough time to spend their time conspiring. Most just get on with doing a good job.

‘tends off thousands’???
Where do you get that stat if the women are not reporting this to the police?
Rather hyperbolic.
And the country cannot afford to support these ‘tens of thousands’ of women who apparently choose not to use birth control and so end up with…how many children? And children in abusive households.
Really??????

Both insurable, either through savings and / or purchased insurance. The state shouldn’t have to baby everyone. People should build resilience into their own finances

Hmm. Pretty sure that’s exactly what Kier did with Private School VAT…

I don’t think that’s fair, I have had friends get ill very young which can make insurance prohibitive.

Look, at the end of the day both Labour and the Conservatives have been guilty of neglecting defence spending over many years.

Both Labour and Conservatives agree defence spending needs to increase.

Neither Labour nor the Conservatives have an economically sound proposal as to how to immediately do that. The Conservatives claim they have but in reality independent economic analysis shows you can’t fund defence through welfare cuts alone (not least because of our old friend, cost shifting): https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/comment/welfare-versus-defence-framing-oversimplifies-difficult-trade-offs

I get why the Conservatives want to make this into a wedge issue for party political reasons, but that won’t make the country safer. Proper long term, consensus building politics - like the Norwegian 12 year defence plans - might.

We know Labour cant. Which was why I was suggesting to @Theseagullwhisperer that a cross party concensus was unlikely.

Why they need one with their massive majority anyway I do not know. Maybe AB needs the opposition to help him with his votes against the wishes of the PLP.....

Why does AB need the Conservatives with his huge majority....?? Are you suggesting AB cannot control his party?

This. We need for self responsibility in this country. Not learned helplessness with the state picking up what should be basic responsibilities of an individual.

Look at even the energy price increase recently. People aghast at the fact that (surprise surprise) energy prices might go up and demanding that the government step in and bail them out. Rather than living within their means, building a buffer, so on and so forth.

They forget that the government bailing them out is just (a really inefficient and thus expensive way for) other people paying for them.

Look at maslow’s hierarchy of needs. People aren’t even taking responsibility for their most basic needs. It’s ridiculous.

@Theseagullwhispereragree it’s needs to be cross party consensus

Why though? Labour have a huge majority. They don't need the consent of other parties.

Its because the PLP won't agree in reality isnt it.

Look at even the energy price increase recently. People aghast at the fact that (surprise surprise) energy prices might go up and demanding that the government step in and bail them out. Rather than living within their means, building a buffer, so on and so forth.

I thought the backlash to means testing winter fuel was crazy & the threshold is still to high.

@Pineneedlesincarpetpersonally I think things like defence, the NHS needs long term strategy so it’s pointless having one party introduce something that another party then reverses if they get into power.

It’s not about Andy Burnham. It’s not about Keir Starmer. It’s not about Rishi Sunak or Liz Truss or Boris Johnson or Theresa May.

That is the whole point of a long term strategic defence plan - like the ones other countries - notably those who share a border with Russia and therefore understand the very real dangers of the world we live in - have.

A long term defence plan would be agreed by all parties, over a period outside of the electoral cycle so the military are never dependent on how popular a government or its leader is or isn’t. It is intended to provide predictability for the armed forces and the defense industry, ensuring procurement etc is not canceled or altered by a change in government. Military leaders have long advocated for it to happen in the UK.

Why doesn’t she go private? Could it maybe be done more quickly that way? I’ve given up on the NHS and normally go straight to private. Even for GPs. It’s embarrassing how quick you can get an appointment mainly because they bother to organise themselves properly vs the NHS.

Sadly I don’t however get a discount on my NI contributions…. Now there’s an idea?