Neil Duncan-Jordan MP has called on Labour to defend the social-security system and challenge claims from Reform UK and the Conservatives that welfare spending is “out of control”.
The Labour MP for Poole highlighted analysis from the Resolution Foundation showing that welfare spending has not increased as dramatically as political rhetoric often suggests.
Duncan-Jordan said:
“We’re constantly told welfare spending is spiralling.
“Reform and the Tories push this narrative to justify cutting the incomes of those with the least, including disabled people.
“Labour must make the positive case for a strong safety net to protect living standards.”
The Resolution Foundation estimates that social-security spending will amount to 11.1 per cent of GDP during the current financial year.
That is 1.1 percentage points higher than in 2007–08, before the global financial crisis, but 0.9 percentage points lower than at its 2012–13 peak.
The figures challenge the suggestion that welfare spending as a share of Britain’s economy has been rising without restraint.
They also show why debates about the welfare budget must consider where money is being spent and what is driving the pressures.
A growing proportion of expenditure is associated with the state pension, Britain’s ageing population and the increasing number of people experiencing ill health or disability.
By contrast, support for many working-age families has been subjected to years of cuts, freezes and restrictions.
Previous Resolution Foundation research found that changes introduced after 2010 reduced the annual incomes of working-age households receiving benefits by an average of £1,500.
Policies including the benefit cap, the two-child limit, the bedroom tax and the prolonged freeze in working-age benefits contributed to the loss.
Large families, unemployed households and private renters have been among those most severely affected, contributing to high levels of child poverty and homelessness.
Duncan-Jordan’s intervention does not deny that the government must address rising ill health, help more people into suitable work and ensure that public money is used effectively.
However, it argues that successful reform cannot be achieved simply by reducing the incomes of people who are already struggling.
Attempts to cut disability and incapacity benefits without addressing NHS waiting lists, workplace barriers, insecure housing and the shortage of suitable employment risk increasing poverty without improving participation in work.
A credible Labour approach should combine financial security with personalised employment support, better healthcare, accessible workplaces and stronger rights for disabled workers.
The social-security system also performs a wider economic role. It supports families when they lose work, become ill, develop a disability, care for somebody or face unaffordable housing costs.
That protection helps prevent temporary setbacks from becoming homelessness, destitution or permanent exclusion from the labour market.
Reform UK and the Conservatives frequently present welfare as a division between taxpayers and claimants. In reality, millions of households move in and out of support during different stages of their lives, while many benefit recipients are also working and paying taxes.
Labour has an opportunity to reshape the debate by making the case for a system that protects living standards while helping people fulfil their potential.
That means tackling the underlying causes of rising expenditure rather than blaming disabled people, low-income families or those affected by poor health.
Duncan-Jordan’s message is that social security should not be treated merely as a cost to be cut. It is a shared national institution that provides stability, dignity and protection when people need it most.
A strong safety net and an effective employment strategy are not competing objectives. For Labour, they should be essential parts of the same commitment to security, opportunity and social justice.
The figures were checked against the Resolution Foundation’s analysis and its research on the changing distribution of welfare support.
