Andy Burnham must understand that “without national security, there aren’t going to be any benefits”, Kemi Badenoch declared. The Prime Minister, in an astonishing admission, said he was serious about national security, but it “cannot come at the expense of social security”.
Badenoch warns of catastrophic consequences
The comment led to Labour being described as the “welfare party”. And Tory leader Mrs Badenoch warned Mr Burnham that failing to invest in Britain’s Armed Forces could have catastrophic consequences.
Setting out Tory plans to cut welfare spending, she said: “What we’re doing is making sure that people are protected, but capping the amount that people get on benefits because we need to look after our national security. Without national security, there aren’t going to be any benefits. We’re all going to be in danger, far more people will be homeless, and the Government’s first duty is defence of the realm.”
Defence spending and welfare cuts
The Conservative leader has vowed to raise defence spending by £10billion to hit 3 per cent of GDP by 2030. The package included £8billion of cuts to the welfare budget, half of it through reforms to the runaway housing benefit bill.
She said: “What we are saying is that where people are living in areas where it’s too expensive. They’ll have to move somewhere cheaper. Moving somewhere cheaper is what everybody else does.”
Burnham refuses to commit to 3 per cent target
Mr Burnham this week refused to commit to the 3 per cent target, which his new Chancellor John Healey has warned is the minimum needed to keep Britain safe. And the PM accused the Conservatives of proposing “crude” benefit cuts to fund the Armed Forces.
“We do everything to support our national security, but it cannot come at the expense of social security,” he said.
Welfare bill expected to climb
Spending on sickness and disability benefits is on course to hit £109billion by the end of the decade – an increase of more than £30billion on last year. Mrs Badenoch said of Mr Burnham's refusal to cut benefit spending: "This means he's either not going to fund defence or he's doing to fund it by raising taxes. There's no other way.
"I'm very worried because our welfare bill is getting out of control. We're spending more on welfare than we do on defence and education combined.
"We think we need to start capping some of the elements of welfare. We have people who live in areas that are quite expensive and if people need to get local housing allowance, they need to move somewhere cheaper. You should aspire to live wherever you want to live, but you shouldn't aspire for the government, i.e. other taxpayers, to pay for you to live wherever you want to.
"We're not removing people from homes, this doesn't cover pensioners, existing tenants, but I do think you need to be fair. We're also going to reinstate the two-child benefit cap. I think other people who are choosing not to have more children because they can't afford it should not be paying for other people to have children."
Asked how he would find the money to meet defence spending targets, the Prime Minister said: “We do everything to support our national security. But it can’t come at the expense of social security.”
He added: “I don’t think myself that taking £4bn out of housing benefit is going to get the right consensus around this issue because that would create levels of homelessness in this country that we wouldn’t have seen before – hundreds of thousands of children in temporary accommodation.”
The welfare bill is expected to climb from £333bn to £407bn by 2030/31, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility.
