Welfare

Alex McIntyre Excerpts

Wednesday 11th November 2026 Commons Chamber

[Priti Patel]

There is plenty of investment, starting with the work that needs to take place at the Treasury to stop putting burdens on businesses. We can have the same conversation in the other debate later this afternoon.

Back in 2010, we inherited a fiscal position in which £1 in every £4 spent was borrowed. When up against a weak fiscal position, the Government of the day have a duty to ensure they incentivise work, get more people off welfare and back into work—particularly at a time when unemployment had been rising. [Interruption.] If the hon. Member listens and goes back and looks at how the last Conservative Government did, he will know that is the case.

We saw around 1 million young people who were not in education, employment or training. Within five years, as I said in my intervention on the Minister, the number of workless households had fallen by 600,000. Over 370,000 fewer children were growing up in households where no one had a job. That is really important, because employment levels for single parents and those with disabilities and barriers to employment had also increased. Of course, it was the combination of the Work programme—all colleagues in the House should give some time to look at this—universal credit and welfare reforms that encouraged more people into work and gave them something we should all care about: the security and dignity that comes with having a job.

None of this is easy. This afternoon, we will hear lots of point scoring, but I stood at the Government Dispatch Box along with my hon. Friends to do the heavy lifting on welfare reform. In fact, it was prior to 2010, during the Government in which the Minister served—I think he was in the Treasury; he may correct me if I am wrong—that the Work programme first came into the public domain. We all heard about how the Work programme was all about working with employers and giving them incentives to do much more to get people into work. That also led to young people getting into work and more apprenticeships.

Apprenticeship starts are not straightforward; we have to incentivise them. People with disabilities had been written off—that was why we had Disability Confident, and I am pleased to hear that more work is being done to look at that scheme to get more people into work. All those people had been written off under previous Governments.

In the past, it was easier to sign people off than to create pathways to meaningful employment. We all have a duty to work with businesses in our constituencies to help people get into work. Madam Deputy Speaker, I am sure you saw in your constituency that employment rates increased for those signed off and on benefits. We also saw a halving of youth unemployment. Those are the things that had been achieved under previous Governments. Then, of course, we had the pandemic—we have heard about that—which absolutely changed the situation.

Under previous Conservative Governments, in every debate, every question time and every Budget—this is why I made the point I did to the Minister—our welfare reforms were not supported universally in the House, including by Labour Members. As the Minister does now, I fielded endless questions, urgent questions and Westminster Hall debates from Labour Members who simply could not accept that supporting people into employment and reducing welfare dependency was the right thing to do for those who had become trapped on welfare.

Nothing is worse than seeing families trapped on welfare, with the intergenerational welfare dependency that creates. All credit to colleagues, including former Secretaries of State, who worked hard to tackle that. We have a duty to find ways to reduce the costs for taxpayers and to do more to create pathways to work.

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

The right hon. Lady says that there is nothing worse than seeing a family on benefits, but there was something worse between 2010 and 2015. In 2010, the Trussell Trust had 35 food banks in this country, but by 2015, it had 1,375 handing out 1.1 million food parcels a year. Does she agree that seeing a family not able to feed themselves and their kids, despite being in work and perhaps receiving some welfare, might be worse than having a welfare state supporting them?

[Priti Patel]

I remember what that time was like, and I remember the arguments about food banks—there were endless debates in the House about that. Is the hon. Member telling me that food bank usage has declined? It simply has not, and that is a stain on our society. [Hon. Members: “It has!”] I am afraid that is not correct. Why are we having this debate? It is because the welfare state is growing, and it is unsustainable. There are more people out of work now.

Labour Members cannot say hand on heart that their employment policies are helping the employment market. They should come to the Witham constituency, or go to any constituency, where they will see employers—family-run businesses—struggling to recruit and employ people because of Labour’s regressive taxation policies. Higher levels of employment tax mean more unemployment, which means more people going on to welfare. These are the basic policies—[Interruption.] There is no point in trying to point score; these are basic policies that the House has to get right.

There has to be recognition right now that the current policies are not helping people get into work. It is too easy to write off people on welfare, but all credit to Opposition Front-Bench Members who are saying things that people do not want to hear. Too many labels are being attributed to people out there in society that write them off. That is a stain on society. We should be helping them and working with employers to incentivise them back into work, not just have them trapped in welfare and benefit dependency.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alex McIntyre (Gloucester) (Lab)]

Yesterday, the Conservative party told young people in my constituency that they are not showing up. I want to talk about the young people in Gloucester, who are ready to show up, and about what it will take to ensure that, when they do, somebody opens the door for them.

Let us start with the Conservatives’ record. The welfare bill did not appear from nowhere; it grew on their watch in a system they designed. In the last five years of the previous Government, the number of young people not in employment, education or training rose by more than 250,000, and welfare went up by £33 billion in that Government’s last year alone. Their plan to chase after Reform, to talk down to people on benefits, to pit neighbour against neighbour and simply to shout at people that they need to go back to work is not new, either. It is the exact same playbook we saw under 14 years of Conservative Government. What happened? More young people were left behind, there were queues round the corner for food banks, and almost one in three children—many of whom had parents in work—were growing up in poverty. We also had a special educational needs and disabilities system that failed to deliver for young people in my constituency, setting so many of them off on the wrong path and writing off their life chances at the earliest stage.

Now, the Conservatives want £36 billion more in cuts, and the shadow Work and Pensions secretary has confirmed that there will be no extra money for employment support. Same plan, no new support and expecting different results is not actually a plan—it is the definition of insanity.

Of course, we all want a lower welfare bill, but the question is how we get there. Alan Milburn’s interim report is clear about the scale of the challenge: nearly 1 million young people aged 16 to 24—one in eight young people—are not in education, employment or training. The review estimates the annual cost of that to our country at £125 billion, which is more than we spend on education each year, yet only about one in five NEET young people in England is getting meaningful employment support, and less than half of the £8.1 billion spent on key benefits for young people has any participation support attached to it. That is the real scandal of the system the Government inherited: it spent billions of pounds on benefits for young people but far too little on helping them into work.

In Gloucester, more than 2,500 young people are not in employment, education or training. When I speak to them, I hear the same thing time and again: they have applied for job after job, only to be ghosted. They are not lazy. They want to work. I am pleased that this Government are acting. The £3,000 youth jobs grant supports any employer that takes on a young person who has been claiming universal credit for six months, in a genuine job of at least 25 hours per week. The Budget delivered a jobs guarantee for eligible 18 to 24-year-olds on universal credit and £100 million for local apprenticeship services. Because the Government are getting people into work rather than writing them off, like the Conservative party, we will bring the welfare bill down for good—not by slamming doors in people’s faces but by opening them.

National action must be matched by local leadership. That is why on the 30 November, I will host the Gloucestershire Futures summit at Kingsholm stadium with Gloucestershire county council. We will bring together schools and colleges, employers, health services, local government and the voluntary sector in one room, with one shared goal that no young person in Gloucestershire is left behind. I am delighted that the Skills Minister will join us. The summit builds on our Gloucester Futures programme from this summer, from which 20 young people graduated after a week with local employers and partners from Fasthosts and the University of Gloucestershire to The Music Works and the Gloucester Rugby Foundation.

In Gloucestershire, we have to make sure that support sits in the communities that need it most, that growth and opportunity are our ambition for Gloucester and not just for Cheltenham, and that national initiatives are run by trusted community partners with a stake in our city. I have two asks of the Minister. First, will he meet me after our summit on 30 November, so that the solutions that Gloucestershire’s employers and partners come up with can feed into the Government’s response to the Milburn review? Secondly, will the Minister ensure that support reaches young people where they are and not where local government sit?

The Conservatives want to talk down Gloucester’s young people but, in fact, they are already showing up. Our job and this Government’s job is to make sure that when they do, the door is open, the support is there and we get them back into work.