Starmer defends calling benefit cuts plan ‘moral’ after Diane Abbott says it’s all about cost cutting, not morality
Diane Abbott (Lab) says the welfare system can be a nightmare to navigate, and needs to reform. But she calls for less of the rhetoric about this being “moral”.
There is nothing moral about cutting benefits for what may be up to one million people. This is not about morality. This is about the Treasury’s wish to balance the books on the back of the most vulnerable and poor people in this society.
Starmer says Abbott has been a passionate advocate on this issue for a long time. But he disagrees, he says. The current system is broken, he says. He goes on:
I think one in eight young people not in employment, training or education, that’s a million young people, I think that’s a moral issue.
Because all the evidence suggests that, someone in that situation, at that stage of their life, is going to find it incredibly difficult ever to get out of that level of dependency. That cuts across the opportunity and aspiration at the root of my values, and Labour values, about how we take working people forward. So I do see it as a moral issue.
I’m not going to turn away from that. I am genuinely shocked that a million people, young people, are in that position, and I’m not prepared to shove my shoulders and walk past them.
Key events
No 10 brands Badenoch ‘climate defeatist’
Downing Street has described Kemi Badenoch as a “climate defeatist”.
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing, the PM’s press secretary was asked about the speech Badenoch gave yesterday saying reaching net zero by 2050 was impossible, and whether Keir Starmer believed, unlike Badenoch, that net zero targets will drive up living standards. She replied:
Absolutely … Net zero is an opportunity to be seized.
It’s good for the economy, good for UK businesses, jobs, apprenticeships and growth.
The leader of the opposition has become a climate defeatist.
Government to consult on holding national day to honour victims and survivors of terror attacks
Plans for a national day to honour victims and survivors of terror attacks have been announced as part of government efforts to boost support for those affected by terrorism, PA Media reports. PA says:
Views are being sought over the move from victims, survivors and the public on what the day would be called, ways for victims to be commemorated and a date for the event.
A 12-week consultation launched today comes after survivors of terror attacks have campaigned for more recognition and support for those affected by atrocities.
The government has also announced plans to set up a new support hub to help victims in the immediate and long-term aftermath of terror attacks.
Security minister Dan Jarvis said: “The impact of a terrorist attack is long-lasting and evolving. Victims and survivors of terrorism need the highest levels of support to recover and rebuild their lives. These reforms will significantly enhance the support available to those affected.
Rachel Reeves will not announce an extension of the freeze in income tax thresholds in the spring statement next week, Pippa Crerar, the Guardian’s political editor, is reporting. At PMQs Keir Starmer refused to rule this out. (See 1.53pm.) But Pippa reports on social media.
I understand that Rachel Reeves will NOT be making any tax changes next week in her spring statement.
She has previously said she wouldn’t extend freeze on the income tax threshold – this hasn’t been ruled out but it would be at autumn budget.
Tories have suggested govt is planning move for next week.
Starmer declines to repeat at PMQs Reeves’ pledge not to extend income tax threshold freeze
Here is the PA Media news story from PMQs.
Keir Starmer failed to repeat the chancellor’s commitment not to extend the freeze on income tax, ahead of next week’s spring statement.
Kemi Badenoch pressed the prime minister to reaffirm the pledge during PMQs.
In the autumn budget, Rachel Reeves decided not to extend the freeze on the thresholds at which people start to pay different rates of income tax.
Thresholds were initially frozen by the previous Conservative government until April 2028.
In the Commons, the Conservative leader also accused Starmer of digging his own black hole and urged him to protect hospices from national insurance increases.
Badenoch said: “The chancellor promised a once-in-a-parliament budget that she would not come back for more. And in that budget, she said there will be no extension of the freeze in income tax thresholds. Ahead of the emergency budget, will he repeat the commitment that she made?”
Starmer replied: “She’s got such pre-scripted questions she can’t actually adapt them to the answers that I’m giving. I think she now calls herself a Conservative realist. Well, I’m realistic about the Conservatives.
“The reality is they left open borders and she was the cheerleader. They crashed the economy, mortgages went through the roof. The NHS was left on its knees, and they hollowed out the armed forces.
“This government has already delivered two million extra NHS appointments, 750 breakfast clubs, record returns of people who shouldn’t be here, and a fully-funded increase in our defence spending. That is the difference that a Labour government makes.”
UPDATE: Reeves is not going to extend the income tax threshold freeze in the spring statement, the Guardian understands. See 1.57pm.
PMQs – snap verdict
The two best moments of PMQs came when Keir Starmer was challenged about the disability benefit cuts – first by Colum Eastwood (who is not a Labour MP, but who belongs to a sister party, the SDLP, and who expressed what a lot of Labour MPs are thinking), and then by Diane Abbott (who is a Labour MP, but who would have been an an ex-MP by now if the Starmerites had managed to include her in the pre-election Corbynite purge, as they originally wanted). The two backbenchers asked serious, emotionally-charged questions, and Starmer replied respectfully.
By contrast, Starmer’s exchanges with Kemi Badenoch were a bit ‘so what?’ It was very much in no-score draw territory. But, for Badenoch, that is a distinct improvement on some of her recent performances.
Badenoch kept most of her questions quite short, which probably helped. She started by asking Starmer why he was holding an “emergency budget” next week, challenging him to say that the spring statement won’t amount to an emergency budget. Starmer, probably wisely, decided not to engage in a dispute about a matter of journalistic semantics (technically, next week’s announcement isn’t a budget, but it will probably feel like a budget, and some journalists will describe it as much). This did not really do much harm, but Badenoch might have helped make the “emergency budget” label stick.
Starmer looked more uncomforable when Badenoch asked why Labour MPs would be voting to overturn a Lords amendment that would exempt hospices from the employer national insurance increase. The PM was not exactly wounded by the exchange, but he looked as if he would rather be talking about something else (as he also did when Ed Davey raised the matter later). He resorted to his stock answer about the government needing to raise more money, and the opposition parties supporting the budget spending increases but not the measures that funded them. We will be hearing these points for months and years to come, because they are decent arguments.
Finally, Badenoch challenged Starmer to confirm that the spring statement will stick to the pledge made by Rachel Reeves last year when she said in her budget “ there will be no extension of the freeze in income tax and national insurance thresholds beyond the decisions made by the previous government”. Starmer refused to give that assurance, which means news organisations can now report this as a hint that the freeze in tax thresholds might be extended next week. (In practical terms, this would feel like a tax rise.) From Badenoch’s point of view, this is a result.
After PMQs a Tory spokesperson said:
The prime minister just failed to repeat the chancellor’s pledge not to extend the freeze on income tax. The only logical conclusion is that at next week’s emergency budget Labour are plotting stealth taxes to drag more people into paying higher tax rates.
At the post-PMQs briefing No 10 also refused to rule out the freeze in tax thresholds being extended next week, and so perhaps Badenoch is onto something.
But there are other “logical conclusions”. It is quite normal for PMs to refuse to answer questions about forthcoming budgets spring statements, because that sets a precedent allowing MPs and journalists to find out what is being planned by elimination questioning. Maybe Starmer and Reeves are planning a new stealth tax? Or maybe Starmer just did not want to engage. The Whitehall spin machine may provide a clearer answer later today, or before next Wednesday, but at this point we don’t know.
Colum Eastwood, the SDLP MP, asked probably the most powerful question at PMQs, about the disability benefit cuts. I did not cover it earlier (it came just after the Starmer/Badenoch exchanges), but you can watch it here.
Upsetting scenes in #PMQs as Colum Eastwood MP (Foyle, Social Democratic & Labour Party) rips into his PM Keir Starmer asking why the fuck is one of his highly disabled constituents going to get nothing and all her benefits snatched. Starmer basically replies, tough. pic.twitter.com/FAYbua3hOf
— MrBounceBack.com (@Bounce_BackLoan) March 19, 2025
Starmer defends calling benefit cuts plan ‘moral’ after Diane Abbott says it’s all about cost cutting, not morality
Diane Abbott (Lab) says the welfare system can be a nightmare to navigate, and needs to reform. But she calls for less of the rhetoric about this being “moral”.
There is nothing moral about cutting benefits for what may be up to one million people. This is not about morality. This is about the Treasury’s wish to balance the books on the back of the most vulnerable and poor people in this society.
Starmer says Abbott has been a passionate advocate on this issue for a long time. But he disagrees, he says. The current system is broken, he says. He goes on:
I think one in eight young people not in employment, training or education, that’s a million young people, I think that’s a moral issue.
Because all the evidence suggests that, someone in that situation, at that stage of their life, is going to find it incredibly difficult ever to get out of that level of dependency. That cuts across the opportunity and aspiration at the root of my values, and Labour values, about how we take working people forward. So I do see it as a moral issue.
I’m not going to turn away from that. I am genuinely shocked that a million people, young people, are in that position, and I’m not prepared to shove my shoulders and walk past them.
John Hayes (Con) says crossbows can cost lives in the hands of killers. The last government launched a consultation on their use. They are as powerful as guns. Will the government give a clear decision before Easter on what it will do about this.
Starmer says Hayes is right to raise this. The government is working on this, he says.
Lee Dillon (Lib Dem) says President Putin is “playing for time” and not signing up to a ceasefire. He says now is the time to seize frozen Russian assets.
Starmer says the asset issue is “complicated”. The UK is working with other countries to see what is possible. But it is “not straightforward”.
Lee Anderson (Reform UK) says he comes to the Commons to ask sensible questions.
MPs laugh at this.
Anderson ploughs on, asking by how much the world’s temperature would fall if the UK achieved net zero tomorrow.
Starmer says Anderson knows his views on net zero. But he accuses Reform UK of “fawning over Putin”, and says they have not even got enough MPs to fit in the back of a taxi.
Uma Kumaran (Lab) says Straford and Bow, her constituency, has the largest number of high-rise buildings with dangerous cladding in the country.
Starmer says the government has signed a contract with developers to address this.
John Cooper (Con) says the MoD is using procurement systems designed for peacetime. Will the PM change this?
Yes, says Starmer. But he says the Tories left a mess, having not made the investment needed.
Anneliese Midgley (Lab) asks about the TV drama Adolescence, which explores the radicalisation of young men, and asks the PM to back a campaignt to tackle toxic misogyny.
Starmer says he is watching this at home with his teenage children, and it is very good. The radicalisation of young men online is abhorrent, he says. It is important to tackle this growing problem.
Nick Timothy (Con) asks about compensation for victims of the infected blood scandal, saying some victims are having compensation cut.
Starmer says the Tories committed to this compensation, but did not budget for it. The government is committed to acting on the inquiry’s recommendation, he says.
Brian Leishman (Lab) asks about support for workers at the Grangemouth oil refinery who are losing their jobs.
Starmer says every employee made redundant will get 18 months’ pay.
