Claim f346fa17Checked 21 Jul 2026
UnsupportedOn the evidence scale
The Conservatives put the bill through the roof.
Interpreted asmetaphor
The Conservatives caused costs to rise dramatically.
Keir StarmerLabourThe Prime Minister·Engagements·03 Jun 2026Causal
Reasoning & Evidence21 Jul 2026
**Identifying the claim:** In the speech context, Starmer says: "They introduced a system that is broken, they put the bill through the roof." The claim "The Conservatives caused costs to rise dramatically" refers to the welfare/social security bill — that Conservative policies (2010–2024) caused welfare costs to increase substantially. **Cause:** Conservative welfare policies (including Universal Credit, structural reforms to the benefits system, etc.) **Effect:** Dramatic rise in the welfare bill/costs **Assessment of the evidence:** 1. **Overall spending rose only modestly as a share of GDP.** The Resolution Foundation reports that total social security spending rose from 10.0% of GDP (2007-08) to 11.2% (2024-25) — a 1.2 percentage point increase over 14+ years, which they explicitly describe as "modest." The IFS similarly notes spending grew "significantly faster than expected" recently but in the context of a relatively stable share of national income. 2. **Welfare spending actually *fell* during the 2010s under Conservative austerity.** According to the IFS and Resolution Foundation, welfare spending fell by about one-fifth (17%) as a share of GDP between 2009-10 and 2019-20. The OBR's own Welfare Trends Report documents that the Conservatives announced approximately 150 separate welfare cuts, froze working-age benefits for four years, introduced the two-child limit, the benefit cap, and below-inflation uprating for 7 of 14 years. The real value of basic unemployment support *fell* 7.6%. 3. **The recent rise (post-2019) was driven by factors outside Conservative policy choices.** The IFS attributes the increase mainly to: (a) rising health/disability benefit caseloads — a demographic/societal trend, not a deliberate policy decision; and (b) higher-than-expected CPI inflation pushing up uprating costs. The state pension triple lock (a Conservative policy) did increase pension spending, but this is one specific element, not a wholesale "putting the bill through the roof." 4. **Conservative policies were designed to *cut* spending, not raise it.** The OBR's 2019 Welfare Trends Report notes that the Summer Budget 2015 package was intended to save £12 billion, and while some savings fell short due to policy reversals and delays, the net direction of policy was toward cutting, not increasing, the welfare bill. Working-age households in the bottom fifth lost an average of £2,800 per year from all social security changes since 2010 (Resolution Foundation). 5. **Universal Credit implementation costs rose, but total UC spending was designed to save money.** The NAO reports UC implementation costs rose to £2.9 billion, and the OBR notes some policy reversals added ~£2 billion/year. But these are small relative to total welfare spending of £220+ billion, and UC was overall designed to reduce spending relative to the legacy system. **Conclusion:** The evidence does not support the claim that the Conservatives "caused costs to rise dramatically." Welfare spending as a share of GDP was broadly stable or falling during most of the Conservative years, and the modest recent increase was driven by rising disability caseloads and inflation — not by deliberate Conservative policy choices to increase spending. Conservative policies overwhelmingly aimed to *cut* working-age welfare. The claim conflates correlation (spending rose in cash/inflationary terms) with causation (Conservative policies caused it), and the magnitude of "dramatically" is not supported by the evidence, which describes the increase as "modest." Sources: Resolution Foundation, "Ratchets, retrenchment and reform: The social security system since 2010" (https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/app/uploads/2024/06/Ratchets-retrenchment-and-reform.pdf); IFS, "How have the size and shape of the UK state changed" (https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-06/IFS-REPORT-How-have-the-size-and-shape-of-the-UK-state-changed-1.pdf); IFS, "The Conservatives and the Economy, 2010–24" (https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-06/WP202424-The-Conservatives-and-the-Economy-2010%E2%80%9324.pdf); OBR, Welfare Trends Report 2019 (https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Welfare-trends_report_December_2019.pdf); OBR, Welfare Trends Report 2014 (http://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Welfare_trends_report_2014_dn2B.pdf); NAO, "Progress in implementing Universal Credit" (https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/progress-in-implementing-universal-credit-summary.pdf)
From speech
They introduced a system that is broken, they put the bill through the roof, and now they want to give us advice on welfare—no thanks! The question should always be not what benefits people are entitled to, but what help we can give people to change their lives. That is what the Work and Pensions Secretary was arguing, and he is right about that. It is a Labour Government that are helping people into work. Leader of the Opposition asks what we have done: more rights for renters, stopping unfair rent hikes, and giving 11 million people greater security and a place to call home; and more rights for workers, including bereavement leave on day one—ask anyone who has lost someone, and they will say just how important it is to have bereavement leave. We have lifted half a million children out of poverty. We often say in this House that every child should go as far as their talent or ability will take them. That does not happen if they are growing up in poverty. The Conservatives have fought us at every turn. I am proud of what we are delivering. There is much more to do.
Sources opened
[1]ifs.org.uk
https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-06/IFS-REPORT-How-have-the-size-and-shape-of-the-UK-state-changed-1.pdf
[2]resolutionfoundation.org
https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/app/uploads/2024/06/Ratchets-retrenchment-and-reform.pdf
[3]obr.uk
http://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Welfare_trends_report_2014_dn2B.pdf
[4]doi.org
https://doi.org/10.63492/ppn033
[5]ifs.org.uk
https://ifs.org.uk/sites/default/files/2024-06/WP202424-The-Conservatives-and-the-Economy-2010%E2%80%9324.pdf
[6]doi.org
https://doi.org/10.63492/gox251
[7]gov.uk
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/benefit-expenditure-and-caseload-tables-2024
[8]assets.publishing.service.gov.uk
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7f6741ed915d74e622a3e9/benefit-tax-credit-expenditure-growth-statistics.pdf
[9]gov.uk
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/welfare-trends-report-june-2026/welfare-trends-report-june-2026
[10]obr.uk
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Welfare-Trends-Report.pdf
[11]ukpublicspending.co.uk
http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/downchart_ukgs.php?bar=1&chart=40-total&color=c&expand=&fy=2010&size=m&stack=1&title=Welfare+Chart&units=p&view=1
[12]obr.uk
https://obr.uk/docs/dlm_uploads/Welfare_trends_report_December_2019.pdf
[13]nao.org.uk
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Rolling-out-Universal-Credit-Summary.pdf
[14]publications.parliament.uk
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubacc/458/report.html
[15]nao.org.uk
https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/progress-in-implementing-universal-credit-summary.pdf
[16]assets.publishing.service.gov.uk
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1110318/uc-business-case-summary.pdf
Prev · 172AA050180 / 578 in this debate · ← →Next · 226EA822