The Efficiency Trap

Governments like to frame their cruellest policies as pragmatic necessities, but what they call ‘efficiency’ is always someone else’s suffering.

Westminster is unsettled, but then when isn’t it? Rachel Reeves, in her latest turn as the iron-fisted steward of fiscal discipline, has announced a £6bn raid on sickness and disability benefits. It is, we are told, a necessary correction: too many people are ‘economically inactive’, a phrase that, like ‘collateral damage’ or ‘friendly fire’, obscures the brutality of its meaning. The new Labour government, having campaigned on the promise of stability, now finds itself improvising a morality play about the deserving and undeserving poor.

The cabinet is not pleased. Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper, and Shabana Mahmood have all registered their discontent. Reeves, for her part, insists that this is the only way forward. ‘Difficult decisions’ must be made, though, as ever, they are never difficult for those making them. Sixteen disability and poverty charities, including Scope and Mencap, have written to the chancellor in protest, warning of the ‘catastrophic’ consequences. But then, charity letters rarely alter the course of government policy.

Keir Starmer has attempted to frame the cuts as an act of salvation rather than punishment. Those languishing on benefits, he argues, have been ‘wasted’ by the system and need to be put to use. The language is instructive. The unemployed are not people, merely surplus material. Labour, having dispensed with the moralising rhetoric of the right, instead treats economic inactivity as a technical failure. The system must be corrected, recalibrated, disciplined into efficiency.

Why do they always try to bury bad news on a Friday? The weekend, it seems, is meant to blunt the impact. A government announcement is made, headlines are generated, and by Monday, they hope, we will have moved on. But we will not have forgotten once the weekend is over. The consequences of this decision will linger, not only in Westminster’s memory but in the lives of those who will wake up next week and the week after still facing the reality of lost income, increased precarity, and the quiet, grinding terror of knowing that the state has turned its back on them. The government may want a brief reprieve from scrutiny, but those affected have no such luxury.

And what is this relentless obsession with ‘economic activity’ if not a symptom of a deeper pathology? The idea that life must be justified through productivity is one of capitalism’s cruellest impositions. As I argued recently in The Tyranny of Work, we are still haunted by the Protestant work ethic, by the idea that to be human is to labour, that idleness is a kind of sin. Even illness and disability must be subjected to the cold logic of productivity: can you still work? If not, can you be made to? If not, then what use are you? Reeves, Starmer, and their allies would never frame it in such crude terms, but the calculus is clear.

In an announcement seemingly designed for an audience of startled health policy wonks, Starmer has declared the abolition of NHS England. The logic remains opaque. A government that decries the instability of Tory rule now proposes to dismantle the very bureaucracy that holds the system together. Unison, the largest healthcare trade union, has called the plan ‘shambolic’. Perhaps the government sees it differently. The NHS, like the unemployed, is to be restructured, reformed, made more ‘productive’.

For all the talk of a Labour government, it is striking how little of Labour’s historical inheritance is recognisable. Starmer, it seems, has no intention of breaking with the post-Thatcherite consensus, only managing it more efficiently. Austerity is rebranded as responsibility; public service cuts are presented as necessary reforms. ‘Difficult decisions’ abound, though the difficulty is always someone else’s to bear. History does not repeat, but it does return, wearing a slightly different mask.

Hold on, stop the presses.

Government Spending, Labour Government, NHS, Welfare

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Share the Post:

A large black-and-white graffiti mural of a young Mike Tyson is painted on the side of a red brick building in New York. The mural shows Tyson before his face tattoo era, capturing his youthful intensity with a stern expression and strong jawline. His name, “MIKE TYSON,” appears in bold white capital letters beside the portrait. The building features classic urban architecture with fire escapes, giving the scene a gritty 1980s New York atmosphere. A streetlamp stands in the foreground, adding to the mural’s dramatic presence.

Biography

The Beast in the Bleachers

Mike Tyson was never just a boxer—he was a system made flesh. Mark Kriegel’s Baddest Man understands this: it’s not a redemption tale but an anatomy of spectacle, where a traumatised boy from Brownsville is forged into a global icon of violence, repackaged as entertainment, and finally rebranded for profit

A stylised graphic portrait of an older man with long hair and a thick beard, rendered in a bold red, navy, and beige palette reminiscent of propaganda posters. His intense gaze and solemn expression evoke a Rasputin-like presence. The background features undulating red and navy stripes that radiate outward, enhancing the image’s hypnotic and authoritative feel.

Alexander Dugin

The New Fascist International: Dugin, Trumpism and the War on Democracy

Alexander Dugin’s Trump Revolution is less a political treatise than a fascist gospel for the post-liberal order—mythic, dangerous, and perfectly in tune with the mood of the new authoritarian right.

Iran

The MAGA Schism: Iran, War, and the Incoherence of America First

As Trump edges closer to war with Iran, the MAGA movement confronts its deepest contradiction: you can’t bomb your way to peace and still call it America First.

The image is divided into three main sections: on the left, dark green conifer trees form a dense forest; on the right, large, jagged orange and yellow flames dominate the frame, licking upwards; above, thick grey smoke billows into a pale blue sky with sharp, graphic cloud shapes. The colours are bold and flat, with a textured, screen-printed effect, evoking urgency and destruction.

Climate Change

The Far Right Would Rather Burn the World Than Change It

The far right has no intention of meeting the climate crisis—they’re not even pretending anymore. As scientists warn we have just two years left to stay within the carbon budget for 1.5C, reactionary forces double down on fossil fuels, culture war, and delay. Their politics is not about preventing collapse, but exploiting it. Climate denial has become climate opportunism—and the cost will be counted in lives.