Prime minister’s questions: a shouty, jeery, very occasionally useful advert for British politics. Here’s what you need to know from the latest session in POLITICO’s weekly run-through.
What they sparred about: Keir Starmer and Kemi Badenoch went toe to toe for the first time in weeks with the prime minister back in the country following his NATO and G7 summit outings. There was only one story in town: the government’s dramatic climbdown on welfare reforms, and the future of his Chancellor Rachel Reeves.
If you were under a rock: The welfare bill passed its second reading in the Commons Tuesday — but only after a huge reverse ferret that meant eligibility changes to the Personal Independence Payment benefit would kick in after a review by Disability Minister Stephen Timms. Many MPs were left very confused about what they were voting for, and ministers have been struggling to explain exactly what impact the climbdown will have on the public finances.
Show me the money: Badenoch didn’t beat around the bush, stating: “It’s been a difficult week.” The original welfare changes were meant to save £5 billion, so the Tory leader asked how much dosh would now be saved. No prizes for guessing the PM ducked that one, simply insisting the reforms were the “right thing to do” and “consistent” with his principles.
Tough old game: The difficult reality of politics was on full show when Badenoch said Reeves was a “human shield” for the PM’s “incompetence” who looked “miserable.” Asking whether the chancellor would still be in place by the next election, Starmer said Badenoch “certainly won’t” because of her “unserious and irrelevant” approach. His refusal to guarantee Reeves’ position (unlike in January) was conspicuous. It was left to the PM’s spokesperson to later insist: “The chancellor is going nowhere. She has the PM’s full backing.”
Tears from Rachel: At one point Reeves, who was sitting on the front bench next to Starmer, appeared to wipe away tears. A spokesperson later told journalists it was a “personal matter,” and insisted the chancellor would be working out of Downing Street this afternoon.
Missing in action: The Tory leader made the most of Tuesday night’s shambolic Commons scenes, asking where on Earth Starmer had been. She had another go at number crunching, probing Starmer about how many people would now get into work. Answer came there none as the PM laid into the Tories for “voting to keep the broken system.”
On the defensive: The Conservatives want to show they’ve changed, but Badenoch desperately defended her party’s record in power, claiming they “cut the deficit” every year until Covid-19, while Starmer was “too weak to get anything done” thanks to his rowdy backbenchers. The PM slammed the party’s 14 years in record. Keep those original lines coming …
Crystal ball gazing: Given Cabinet Office Minister Pat McFadden admitted earlier in the day there would be “financial consequences,” Badenoch asked what everyone was considering: Would Starmer rule out tax rises? The PM hit back by arguing no minister “writes budgets in the future” at the despatch box. But the explicit refusal to rule out changes will have left some MPs — and the public — jittery.
Helpful backbench intervention of the week: Rochdale MP Paul Waugh asked about the extension of free school meals, and said only a Labour government could do this. The PM used the opportunity to talk up his plans — nothing like free PR.
Totally unscientific scores on the doors: Starmer 6/10. Badenoch 8/10. The prime minister was always going to face an impossible hurdle over such last minute changes to a flagship policy that makes the government’s economic position even more perilous. Though facing many problems of her own, Badenoch worked out where Starmer was on shaky ground (funding, employment levels, tax rises and Reeves’ future) and addressed each point in turn. Her inability to get any decisive answers worked in her favor — and gave her the win.
The post PMQs: Starmer torn apart on welfare as Reeves in tears appeared first on Politico.
