Andy Burnham accused of 'turning Labour Party into Welfare Party' as 'national security' remark row deepens

Thank you for subscribing!

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has accused the Prime Minister of saying 'the quiet part out loud'

Andy Burnham has been accused of "turning the Labour Party in the Welfare Party" as his "national security" comment continues to cause contention.

Mr Burnham told the Commons at PMQs that national security could not "come at the expense of social security".

During his second PMQs yesterday, the Prime Minister was pressed by Ms Badenoch on national spending, outlining the Conservatives' proposals to fund defence.

Mr Burnham responded: "We are playing our role around the world and we will continue to do so.

"We should have an honest conversation over this dispatch box. I do not think we should take £4billion cut from housing benefits...That would create levels of homeless we have not seen before.

"Yes we do everything to support our national security but it cannot come at the expense of social security... This side of the House will not be forced to choose between the two."

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has accused the Prime Minister of saying "the quiet part out loud".

"For our new PM, social security - welfare - comes above national security," she wrote in the Mail.

"The Labour Party has become the Welfare Party. The first duty of Government is defence of the country, not paying more benefits."

The Tories last week detailed a plan to find £10billion for defence, largely through axing Britain's ballooning benefits bill by some £8billion.

Ms Badenoch denied her party's plans would create more homelessness, as Mr Burnham suggested, but said some poeple would have to "move somewhere cheaper".

She said last week her party would "remove housing benefit and remove the VAT exemption for Motability" - a scheme that allows disabled people to lease a new car, scooter or powered wheelchair, in order to fund defence.

Speaking to the BBC, the Leader of the Opposition said earlier today: "What we’re doing is making sure that people are protected, but capping the amount that people get on benefits because we need to look after our national security.

"Without national security, there aren’t going to be any benefits. We’re all going to be in danger, far more people will be homeless, and the Government’s first duty is defence of the realm."

She added: "What we are saying is that where people are living in areas where it’s too expensive. They’ll have to move somewhere cheaper. Moving somewhere cheaper is what everybody else does."

The Prime Minister has so far refused to set a date for spending three per cent of GDP on defence, despite his own Chancellor John Healey resigning as Defence Secretary over the issue under Sir Keir Starmer.

In June, Mr Healey wrote in a letter to Sir Keir: "You have been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats."

The Government has pledged to meeting a longer-term ambition, the Nato defence spending target of 3.5 per cent of GDP by 2023.

How Labour will fund both a rise in welfare costs - estimated to climb from £333billion to £407billion by 2030/31 - and the increase in defence spending has come into question.

Shadow Transport Secretary Richard Holden told GB News today: "If he's going to do that, how is he going to pay for it?"

"The only answer to that is going to be taxes, taxes, taxes."

He continued: "Does he actually really believe that he's going to fund our armed forces, and on the flip side, he's also going to say he's going to keep funding welfare?"

The Shadow Transport Secretary suggested the Government was "teeing up the country to come for everybody's wallet and purse".