Streeting risks reigniting Labour civil war in row over benefits cuts to boost defence
Wes Streeting became the first senior cabinet minister to suggest that increased defense spending could come from social savings.
The health secretary said earlier this week that “the money has to come from somewhere”, in a move interpreted as support for George Robertson, Labour’s former defense minister and former NATO secretary-general.
The health minister has since issued a statement denying that he wanted to cut benefits specifically to fund defence.
But there is growing alarm over Sir Keir Starmer’s inability to make a decision on the UK’s defense spending, with the Defense Improvement Plan (DIP) still on his desk after months of wrangling between the Treasury and the Ministry of Defense (MoD).
With a stern warning, Former chief of the defense staff Lord Jock Stirrup said: Independent Britain needs a decade to rebuild its defense capabilities and called on Sir Keir to show leadership in the latest response to the dire state of the defense sector and start reinvesting immediately.
Mr Streeting, Labor leader and understood to still be hoping to replace Sir Keir as prime minister, became the first cabinet minister to speak in favor of cutting Britain’s £334bn welfare budget to fund its military.
By doing so, he risks reopening the divisive lines where Sir Keir was forced into a humiliating U-turn by Labor’s angry supporters last year as he sought to slash the burgeoning welfare budget.
Mr Streeting has previously made clear that money cannot be diverted from health spending, following Labour’s manifesto pledge to increase health spending.
But when asked whether he would support switching funds from the welfare budget, Mr Streeting told LBC: “Yes, we want to reduce the welfare budget.”
LBC’s Nick Ferrari asked Mr Streeting last week about allegations of “corrosive indifference” made by Lord Robertson and other military leaders against Sir Keir.
Lord Robertson of Port Ellen, leader of Labour’s strategic defense review, warned that the army could not be properly funded by an “ever-expanding welfare budget”.
Mr Streeting said: “Yes, and we need to put money into defence.
“As a government we are spending more on defence, but we will need more. This is the reality of the challenges we face in the world.”
But while the Treasury is said to be blocking increases in defense spending, including a deal for UK troops to serve as peacekeepers in Ukraine, the health secretary said it was up to Rachel Reeves to set future Budgets, adding: “I want to make sure I stay in my lane.”
A source close to Mr Streeting later said: “The government’s position is to increase defense spending and reform welfare. Wes has not linked these two positions and has strongly advocated for the removal of the two-child limit, of which he is a strong advocate. Wes is a product of the welfare system so he knows better than most its value and the need for reform.”
There was a fierce response from charities and Labor MPs to the health secretary’s intervention.
Evan John, policy advisor at Sense, said: “It is extremely worrying that the government appears to be laying the groundwork for further cuts to disability benefits, increasing anxiety among disabled people who are already struggling as the cost of living rises.”
Labor MP Rachael Maskell, who led the welfare revolt last year, warned: “I am clear that we need to ensure home security and national security. Playing one against the other is the wrong choice. People supported by the Department for Work and Pensions are already struggling to make ends meet. The Government should not be considering moves like this.”
Former shadow chancellor John McDonnell said: “Having lost the debate over the two-child limit, the winter fuel allowance and cuts to disability benefits, it now seems quite intellectually hopeless to play the poor against the country’s defenses to secure cuts to welfare benefits.”
Another rebel, Norwich South MP Clive Lewis, added: “The usual siren wailing has the Maginot Line thinking for the blitz world.”
Comparing the UK’s situation with France in the 1930s before Hitler’s invasion, he said: “The French state was almost bankrupt by building a fortification on the lessons of the First World War. While the generals congratulated themselves on the backs of their new defences, Germany developed the tank and got around them. These calls to eviscerate prosperity in the name of security deserve to be seen in precisely that light – as the work of the people who fought the last war, at the expense of our ability to fight what may or may not have been.” “I’m actually coming as part of the work of the people who fought in the last war.”
Leading union Unite, one of Labour’s biggest supporters, has demanded more money be put into defence, but has resisted calls to find the money from welfare savings.
Chief Secretary Sharon Graham said: “The Government’s failure to produce DIP poses a threat to national security as well as jobs and skills.
“It is becoming increasingly clear that our armed forces are overstretched and ill-equipped to meet the global challenges we face.
“Our defense workers must be treated as a strategic national asset and when the much-delayed defense investment plan is finally agreed, the money must be spent in the UK.
“Failure to retain and protect the skills and experience of these workers will mean that knowledge vital to defense projects will be thrown away.
“The government must now ensure that contracts for a new batch of Typhoon fast jets, the Skynet satellite and the A400M transport aircraft are signed and that production lines in Britain are operational as soon as possible.”
But Ms Graham rejected a suggestion from Lord Robertson and others that increased defense spending should be increased by cutting the welfare bill, adding: “It is completely wrong to suggest that caring for the most vulnerable would compromise national security.
“We are the sixth richest country in the world. If the government needs to raise funds, it should introduce a wealth tax rather than once again attacking the most vulnerable in society.”
