German Conservatives show why UK didn't have to cut disability benefits to boost defence

The choice between national and social security is a false one and Labour’s benefit cuts will weaken our societal cohesion in a way that’s ripe for exploitation by hostile forces

The UK Government’s proposals to slash welfare spending for disabled people in an effort to balance the books is a profoundly misguided policy. It risks marginalising some of our most vulnerable citizens and undermines the social solidarity at the heart of a just society.

It is also shortsighted in terms of building the sort of societal resilience that the UK has been lacking after 14 years of Conservative rule. Just as the Prime Minister wants to rally “a coalition of the willing” in this age of European rearmament – something I fully support – he should take more time to think about how he rallies those he governs behind the necessary increases in defence spending.

The choice between national and social security is a false one, and it’s one the government risks making by omission. Slashing welfare is not simply an economic adjustment, but a devaluation of human dignity.

The UK needs to increase its defence capabilities, but it's wrong to cut benefits to do so (Picture: Leon Neal) | Getty Images

Strong defence is necessary

Disabled constituents of mine encounter extra barriers in employment, healthcare, and social integration. Cutting their financial support cannot be reduced to simple fiscal restraint; it is a failure to uphold our collective responsibility to care for all members of society. Any diligent local MP will be well aware of the challenges people face. Through constituency work, we see on a daily basis the impact that cuts have on the most vulnerable in society and the stresses that places on other public services.

There is no disputing that a strong defence over a range of security measures is essential in today’s complex world. The recently announced increase in defence spending is welcome, but we need a re-think about our entire approach. There has been a lack of urgency about our security predicament, all too apparent in London and other European capitals, in recent years.

That must change. National security is the first duty of the state, and it’s important that the government brings the public with it as they ask voters to shoulder a far greater burden when it comes to funding defence.

The post-Cold War peace dividend is over, and though voters well understand the need to spend more on security, along with our European partners, all the public polling shows us that they do not want to see it happen at the expense of funding to key public services. The government should be mindful of this and adopt a strategy of funding our defence that the public can support, rather than one that will be damaging and therefore will inevitably breed a sense of anger and resentment in the long run.

Germany changed its law

The Prime Minister risks creating a false dichotomy between national security and social security – a division that ultimately weakens our societal cohesion and national resilience. In an age of information warfare, that is ripe for exploitation by hostile influences, whether they be foreign or domestic.

The Chancellor could do worse than look to Germany for a way forward. Though the context is different, I’ll grant you – Germany has been burdened with a constitutional debt brake on its level of debt to GDP (Schuldenbremse) – its politicians understood that borrowing to fund national security is a perfectly legitimate and reasonable policy in a time of real global crisis and have this week voted to change the country’s “basic law”, or constitution.

If Germany’s incoming Conservative government gets this – and it’s worth noting that they have been backed by the German Labour and Green parties – then surely Chancellor Rachel Reeves can too.

Other funding mechanisms are also available. The Scottish Government used its limited powers to bring in a more progressive taxation system to fund investment in key public services. The UK Government has a range of economic levers it could use, far in excess of those available to any Holyrood administration.

Responsible borrowing, targeted tax increases

That is before we even start on the tens of billions lost to the public finances due to an unpopular Brexit deal. Labour is sticking to Conservative policies on Europe, fiscal rules and a range of other failed policy measures that are costing us all and especially the poorest.

Rather than pitting the needs of disabled people against our armed forces and the legitimate and pressing needs of our national security, we must find better ways to fund our security priorities. Responsible borrowing, ditching failed policies and targeted tax increases could offer a means to invest in national security without resorting to Draconian cuts to essential social support. Sound fiscal management must surely allow for investment in both security and social justice.

Public support is built on trust, transparency, and a sense that the government understands the needs of the country. By engaging with the public and clearly explaining the rationale for borrowing rather than cutting benefits for the most vulnerable, the government can build a political consensus in parliament and across the country. The current course of action is politically inelegant and economically damaging.

We must not be forced to trade one form of security, defence, for another, social. A society that invests in its citizens – especially those who are often marginalised – creates a stronger, more resilient and wealthier country. Responsible borrowing or targeted tax increases to finance defence means we can uphold our commitment to social justice and security without compromising our societal cohesion.

Investing in our national security and welfare safety net should be part of a long-term plan that can command public confidence and support, and you cannot achieve this with short-term fiscal fixes. We must build a future where national and social security are not seen as competing interests but as complementary investments in the security and dignity of every citizen. That makes us all safer and better off in the long run.

Stephen Gethins is the MP for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry