Welfare Reform Fiasco

After weeks of controversy, rebellion and internal chaos, the government eventually got its welfare reforms (the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill) through the commons vote on the second reading on Tuesday night after a series of internal negotiations between the government and its back benchers.

An amendment to the bill (Division 247) failed to pass as the main Conservative opposition failed to back the amendment which was supported by 42 of the government’s own backbenchers, the Liberal Democrat’s and even Reform UK.

The vote passed with a majority of 75 as every opposition party voted Noe on the bill’s second reading alongside 49 of Labour’s own MPs – still a far cry from the over 100 Labour MPs who originally planned to vote against the bill last week.

Why was it so controversial?

Both sides of the political spectrum criticised the bill. Whilst the Conservative opposition said that the bill did not go far enough in its cuts, many Labour backbenchers claimed that the Bill would cut support for the most vulnerable sections of society, especially the disabled.

With the cost of living crisis continuing to cause financial concerns for the British public, many claimed the bill was cutting crucial support at the wrong time – putting lives at risk as a result. 

The concoction of ethical, legal and political issues, made the bill a headache from the very start. With over 100 Labour MPs threatening to rebel against the bill, the government had no choice but to back down to avoid a humiliating defeat in the commons vote.

With notable Labour MPs such as Diane Abbott voting against the bill. It is no wonder that the bill became such a headache for a government trying to pass significant reforms as part of its so-called ‘plan for change’.

What does the rebellion reveal about the government?

The rebellion serves as evidence that no majority can truly secure the passage of a government’s agenda in Parliament. It serves as a crucial reminder that backbench MPs hold significant power and influence over the legislative agenda in Parliament, impacting what legislation passes, when it passes and the contents of the very legislation itself.

Rebellions are nothing new, but they rarely have an impact as significant as they did this week and this is the first rebellion of its kind which has unfolded against the current government with a large majority.

In an age where the focus of the media is focussed so significantly on the work of the executive branch of government, this week has demonstrated that parliamentary sovereignty is still the cornerstone of British democracy and that every member elected to parliament absolutely has a say in the passage of legislation.

What this means for business

It is an indicator that influence matters at every level of government. Simply engaging with the executive branch alone is not enough. It’s the engagement with the wider sphere of influence that makes real change.

It’s about lobbying constituency MPs, engaging with influential backbenchers from across the political spectrum and understanding the arithmetic of parliamentary voting – understanding how opposition votes supplement one-another to cause changes in parliamentary votes contrary to the will of the executive.

Government response

Since the vote, the government has remained relatively quiet on the legislation, attempting to swiftly shift the focus onto its NHS reforms after the Chancellor was observed crying in the commons over a ‘personal matter’.

It’s no surprise that a government with a majority of 172 would try and sweep this vote under the carpet publicly. But internally, the government will be wondering how it can prevent a similar predicament in the future. 

Political uncertainty

Speculation continues to swirl as to whether the government will even attempt to pass another set of welfare reform this term. But one thing is certain, businesses should take the warning – engage with backbenchers or lack influence.