X Close

Labour’s welfare Bill is an empty victory

Despite its large mandate, the Government has struggled to achieve much momentum. Credit: Getty

Despite its large mandate, the Government has struggled to achieve much momentum. Credit: Getty

2 July 2025 - 7:00am

On paper, it looks like a success for the Labour government. The welfare Bill has passed, and the amendment to derail it has been seen off. Yet it is an almost empty victory. Labour rebels have forced major concessions from the top, dealing a blow to Keir Starmer’s credibility in the process. That this crisis comes less than a year in is striking; that the party must survive four more years in this state is almost unthinkable.

It was a tense early evening in the Commons. The rebels seemed strong. Potentially strong enough to defeat the bill in its entirety. Concessions from last week had failed to win them over. So last night brought an even more screeching U-turn, ripping the heart out of the bill and essentially eliminating the planned welfare savings over the course of this parliament. It is hard to think of a more ignominious end for the Bill. At least forcing a vote and losing would have shown some strength of character.

The approach to welfare now looks like a catalogue of unknowns. Labour MPs are still unsure about what this will mean for future recipients of disability welfare. They remain angry over what they see as the “fear” that has been hanging over disabled people as the Bill went through. The fiscal hawks are also unconvinced, with no clear route to reducing benefit spending. A huge amount of political capital has been spent to achieve very little. In the middle of it all, Secretary for Work and Pensions, Liz Kendall, looks humiliated.

The headache will now pass to Rachel Reeves. If these savings can’t be found, they will have to come elsewhere. Yet Labour backbenchers will feel enthused about standing up to a supposed return to austerity. Tax rises in the autumn look more likely now, and Labour’s election pledges are in even more danger. There are perhaps also threats of rebellion on other issues, too.

Certainly, managing the Labour Party now looks more complicated than anyone would have imagined a year ago. Governments typically enjoy a lengthy honeymoon with their own side, yet Starmer’s has evaporated. This is in part driven by the hand he was dealt — with squeezed public services and limited ways of raising money — but also the way he has played it. Throughout this debate, he has failed to charm his backbenchers at all, and his intransigence has forced an internal disagreement to become a very public climbdown. This looks like something you’d expect from a struggling government with a tiny majority in a second or third term, not one just 52 weeks after a historic victory.

It emphasises how much Labour seems to be struggling. Despite its large mandate, the Government has struggled to achieve much momentum. It already feels beleaguered, derided by the public, falling in the polls, and now divided internally. There is plenty of time to change course, but no strategy is emerging to do it. Unless it regains control soon, the next four years will start to resemble a government on life support.


John Oxley is a corporate strategist and political commentator. His Substack is Joxley Writes.

Mr_John_Oxley

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

1 July 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam