By common consent, Kemi Badenoch didn’t just enjoy her best session at Prime Minister’s Questions – faint praise – but one where she clearly got the better of Sir Keir Starmer. That was on the sensitive matter of his appointment of Peter Mandelson to be ambassador in Washington. Her tactics at PMQs may turn out to be a turning point for her leadership, or could just be false hope for the Conservatives. But it’s her proposal to work with Labour on welfare reform that raises some more strategic questions for the party…
What is Badenoch offering Starmer on welfare reform?
Something that sounds very collegiate and even patriotic – superficially, at least. In her words: “The shadow chancellor, shadow welfare secretary and I are making him a clear offer. Sit down with us. Let’s agree a way to bring welfare spending down. And I will offer him the support of the Conservative Party… This is an offer to work together in the national interest to find common ground and get a serious plan.”
Her condition is to keep the two-child cap on child benefit, and for Labour to agree an unquantified reduction in welfare spending (in essence, the 2024 Tory manifesto policy).
Why is she offering this?
Aside from the national interest – saving Britain from a humiliating bail-out by the IMF – it’s fair to say there are some more base political considerations. It would make her look relevant, would suggest only the Tories can be relied on for a plan to get things done, and it would make Labour look pathetic. If Labour rejects it, it gives her an excuse to oppose social security reform policies she’d probably support if she was in office, and she would gleefully watch the government defeated again. A win-win, politically.
What’s in it for Starmer?
Not much, for now. However, Badenoch has spotted that there is no reason why the parliamentary Labour Party – which rejected various earlier proposals for welfare reform – would change its collective mind and agree to, for example, cuts to disability and sickness benefits. Thus Starmer might sooner or later be grateful for Tory votes in the division lobbies.
RECOMMENDED
Trump’s reaction to Charlie Kirk’s death shows all of his worst traits
Undo
Cat Stevens says he was left clinging by his fingertips during near-death experience
Undo
Dementia Has Been Linked To a Common Habit. Do You Do It?Memory Health |
Undo
New Electric Cars Come With Tiny Price Tags (Take A Look)FrequentSearches | Search Ads |
Undo
Powered by TaboolaPowered by Taboola
Indeed, there are some notable examples of prime ministers from both parties turning to the opposition benches to rescue them from defeat by their own backbenches. Tony Blair got his school reforms through thanks to the Tories, Boris Johnson needed Labour to deliver new Covid rules in 2021, while Ted Heath, John Major and Theresa May relied on Liberal Democrats and Labour MPs, sometimes as rebels, to get important European legislation through.
What’s the alternative?
Pat McFadden. Starmer hopes that the new work and pensions secretary can succeed where Liz Kendall and Rachel Reeves failed, and win the case for reform. There are also higher hopes that the new chief whip, Jonathan Reynolds, can actually make some use of Labour’s nominal Commons majority of nearly 150.
Could Badenoch’s idea work?
Not in this parliament. However, peering dimly into the future after the next general election, there might be no alternative to a Labour-Conservative tie-up to stop Nigel Farage getting into No 10 – an outcome even worse than defeat for either party. It might be unthinkable outside wartime for such a “grand coalition”, but the rise of the far right has left many mainstream European parties with no alternative but to work together in the national interest and keep the fascists at bay. For Badenoch, if not some of her followers, Starmer would be a more attractive, or less repulsive, partner than Farage.