Introduction

The UK is witnessing a significant backlash against the Labour government's latest welfare cuts, with thousands protesting across the country under the slogan "Welfare Not Warfare." These cuts, announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves, have sparked widespread concern that they will lead to increased poverty and deaths among the most vulnerable populations. The protests, led by Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) and supported by various trade unions and organizations, highlight the deep unease about the government's priorities regarding social welfare.

Increased Poverty and Deaths

One of the primary concerns raised by activists and trade unions is that the welfare cuts will exacerbate poverty and lead to increased deaths. The government's plan to halve Universal Credit health benefits for new claimants by 2026 and freeze them until 2030 is expected to push an additional 250,000 people—including 50,000 children—into relative poverty by 2029-30[2]. This move is seen as particularly punitive, as it targets those who are already struggling to survive.

Key Concerns About Welfare Cuts:

• Increased Poverty: The cuts will significantly increase the number of people living in poverty, affecting vulnerable groups like disabled individuals and children.
• Health Impacts: Reducing benefits will lead to increased mental distress, self-harm, and potentially more suicides among those who lose support[4].
• Economic Impact: Critics argue that instead of stimulating the economy, these cuts will remove vital financial support from those who need it most, ultimately hurting local economies[2].

The "Welfare Not Warfare" Campaign

The "Welfare Not Warfare" campaign argues that the government should prioritize domestic welfare over military spending. This sentiment is echoed by many protesters who feel that the allocation of billions to defense while slashing social welfare is morally unjustifiable. Signs reading "Cuts kill" and "Cut war not welfare" were prominent during the demonstrations, emphasizing the belief that social welfare should take precedence over military spending[2].

Protests and Rallies Across the UK

Protests were held in major cities across the UK, including London, Glasgow, and Leeds. In central London, over a thousand people marched to Parliament as part of their demonstration[1]. Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell spoke at the event, calling for reconsideration of the cuts. However, many critics feel that these appeals lack concrete actions to resist the government's policies[1].

Notable Cities:

• London: Demonstrators marched from Downing Street to Parliament, voicing strong opposition to the cuts.
• Glasgow: Activists targeted the Ministry of Defence building, highlighting the contrast between military spending and welfare cuts.
• Leeds: A smaller but equally determined group protested the impact on local families and disabled individuals[2].

Trade Union Support

Trade unions such as Unison, Unite, GMB, UCU, and CWU have shown strong support for the protests, with representatives attending rallies and speeches. The mood among these unions is one of outrage, with many feeling that the Labour government is acting in a manner similar to its Conservative predecessors[2].

PCS Union Response: The PCS (Public and Commercial Services) union has been particularly vocal about the potential consequences of the welfare cuts, emphasizing that they will undoubtedly lead to deaths among those affected[5]. This warning comes from a context of heightened concern that the cuts will exacerbate existing social issues.

The Economic and Moral Case

Economically, welfare benefits have a multiplier effect, as recipients often spend their support on essential goods and services locally. This injection of cash into the economy can actually boost local businesses and help stimulate economic recovery. However, the cuts threaten to remove this vital financial lifeline from communities that need it most[2].

Morally, the decision to prioritize military spending over welfare support has been widely criticized as draconian and heartless. Critics argue that any government serious about social welfare should prioritize the well-being of its most vulnerable citizens over military adventurism[3].

Conclusion

As the UK faces potentially devastating welfare cuts, the public's response has been clear: social welfare should not be sacrificed for military spending. The ongoing protests and rallies reflect deep-seated dissatisfaction with the government's policies, which many believe will have tragic consequences. Activists are calling for immediate action to reverse these cuts and ensure that welfare support is maintained.

---