Claim 41fffe66Checked 21 Jul 2026
Partly True/FalseOn the truth scale
“The Prime Minister does not have enough votes to reform welfare.”
—Mrs Kemi BadenochConservativeCon / North West Essex·Engagements·03 Jun 2026Factual · official legal institutional
Reasoning & Evidence21 Jul 2026
The claim accurately reflects the demonstrated weakness of Starmer's position on welfare reform — his original reforms were gutted by his own MPs, and no new welfare bill was brought forward. However, the absolute assertion that he "does not have the votes" is a prediction about a hypothetical vote that has not taken place, and the evidence suggests that with sufficient concessions (as happened in July 2025), the government could potentially pass some form of welfare legislation.
The claim captures a real and well-documented dynamic: Labour backbench opposition has effectively stymied substantial welfare reform, forcing the government to shelve its original plans and omit welfare legislation from the King's Speech. The arithmetic supports the claim — if a rebellion of 130+ Labour MPs materialized, it would exceed the government's majority. In July 2025, Starmer's Universal Credit and PIP Bill passed its second reading 335–260, but only after major concessions forced by a massive Labour backbench rebellion. More than 130 Labour MPs signed an amendment against the original bill, enough to defeat the government's working majority. The key PIP eligibility reforms were shelved until after the Timms review (due autumn 2026). Even in its watered-down form, 49 Labour MPs voted against. By June 2026, Badenoch noted there was no welfare bill in the King's Speech and accused Starmer of "giving up" on welfare reform. Badenoch herself offered Conservative votes for welfare reforms. Multiple reports (PoliticsHome, iNews) indicate Labour backbenchers remained opposed to substantial welfare cuts.
However, the claim is phrased as an absolute statement ("does not have the votes") about a hypothetical future vote that had not been scheduled. The previous watered-down bill did pass. iNews reporting suggests some Labour rebels could be receptive to a second attempt if paired with investment in employment support. The claim is essentially a political prediction dressed as an established fact — strongly supported by circumstantial evidence but not a verifiable fact about a vote that has occurred.
Sources:
- BBC News — https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgep3r9yg34o
- Reuters — https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-pm-starmer-wins-vote-parliament-welfare-reform-2025-07-01/
- AP News — https://apnews.com/article/uk-starmer-labour-welfare-rebellion-ec78160cfff4673978916a3f86b67a5e
- Sky News — https://news.sky.com/story/starmer-survives-rebellion-as-watered-down-welfare-cuts-pass-key-vote-13390841
- Politics Home — https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/will-major-welfare-reform-happen-next-year
- The Independent — https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-welfare-reform-bill-vote-result-labour-rebels-b2780523.html
- iNews — https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/pip-reforms-push-claimants-work-more-likely-4451998
- The Herald — https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/national/26195114.badenoch-calls-pm-resign-cannot-prove-defence-plan-protects-uk/
From speech
The truth is that unemployment has risen every single month since they came into office. Mr Speaker, you can listen to their cheers get weaker and thinner with every passing moment. The fact is, despite his huge majority, the Prime Minister does not have the votes to reform welfare. There is a solution—a Conservative solution—[Interruption.] Labour Members are all jeering now, but I do not know why they are supporting the Prime Minister; he is more than happy to release their text messages while all of his have disappeared. Disappearing messages from a disappearing PM. There is a Conservative solution: benefits bill down, taxes down, growth up. Everyone in this House knows that the Prime Minister is just a caretaker keeping the seat warm for the Mayor of Manchester. But it does not matter who is in charge; Labour MPs will keep asking who they can tax to pay more benefits—it is in their DNA. The truth is that the problem is not this passive Prime Minister; the problem is the Labour party.
Sources opened