Why did Starmer’s disabled brother die poor?

Just when you thought Keir Starmer couldn’t get any lower, he’s now using the death of his brother as a justification for cutting benefits.

Starmer puff piece in the Mirror

Writing exclusively for the Daily Mirror, Starmer shares that the “system failed” his brother. Starmer says that Nick, who died on Boxing Day 2024:

had difficulties learning when he was growing up. He spent much of his life drifting from job to job in real hardship.

The system didn’t work for him. There are millions in the same boat. Held back by a system that doesn’t work for them.

So you’d think, with this in mind, that Starmer would be pledging to do more for disabled people who struggle to keep a job or can’t work at all.

Instead, he pushes out a fluff piece totalling just 364 words that. Like most things that come out of Starmer’s mouth, it has absolutely no substance.

There’s also the fact that the Mirror gave the Prime Minister the space to publish this absolutely nothing article, just bigging himself up, when for the past week he’s been clinging onto Number 10 by his nails. It’s a highly suspect move for a supposedly working-class paper.

Using his dead disabled brother for sympathy

Despite his brother being a disabled man who, apparently, lived in poverty, Starmer’s little PR piece doesn’t mention disabled poor people at all.

Obviously, he has time to swipe at Reform, even though the Labour-run DWP is already implementing nearly all the things Reform proposed for benefits in their economic plan.

He also found space to brag about lifting the two-child cap, which he and ministers could’ve lifted a year and a half ago but instead chose party politics.

However, as the Canary has previously reported, lifting the two-child cap can’t be all the government does. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation found that if the government only relies on the child cap lifting and does little else, poverty will only fall by 1% by 2029.

It’s a bit rich that the prime minister is using his dead, poor disabled brother to gain support at a time when Labour threatens to leave millions more in the same position. Under Starmer’s Labour, the DWP plan to half Universal Credit “health” element for new claimants.

There are also longterm plans to move it over to PIP, despite the fact that PIP has nothing to do with being unemployed.

The government is also hell-bent on getting disabled people back into work, whether or not they actually can. And whilst they’re doing that, they’re gutting support for disabled people in work.

Why did his brother die poor when Starmer’s rich?

So it’s absolutely vile that Starmer is using his brother’s death to rehabilitate himself, whilst if he weren’t related to him, he’d sooner spit on him than help him.

But that’s what I can’t get my head around, because it makes no sense that his brother did die in “virtual poverty”. Starmer’s a millionaire for fucks sakes. Nick died at the end of 2024, but in the tax year leading up to April 2024 alone, Starmer made £152,225.

I know family can be stubborn and proud, but something isn’t adding up here. I’m not doubting that Starmer is grieving for his loved one, but if this is true, Starmer’s basically admitting he let his brother die poor.

But that says it all about the way Labour and Starmer see disabled people. Why should disabled people expect real, life-changing support, when they obviously just aren’t trying hard enough with the bare minimum. In Starmer’s world even his own family don’t deserve to live if they can’t jump through every hoop the DWP throws at them.

Featured image via the Canary