Independent and former-Labour MP Zarah Sultana has savaged Keir Starmer and Morgan McSweeney over their decision to boot four MPs out of the Parliamentary Labour Party – all because they dared vote against the government over its despicable attacks on chronically ill and disabled people. It was via the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)-centred Universal Credit Bill.
DWP welfare bill: fallout grows
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has withdrawn the parliamentary whip from four of his MPs—Rachael Maskell, Neil Duncan‑Jordan, Brian Leishman, and Chris Hinchcliff—following their rebellion against his plans for DWP cuts to disabled people’s benefits. Although framed as discipline against key organisers of the rebellion, critics argue this is a punitive act of political cowardice.
However, independent MP Sultana summed up the malice of Starmer and his senior-most advisor McSweeney – the man who tried to kill the Canary and destroy Corbyn:
A year ago, Starmer & McSweeney suspended 7 of us for voting to scrap the two-child benefit cap & immediately lift 350,000 kids from poverty.
Now they’re punishing MPs who opposed cuts that would push 800,000 disabled people into poverty.
Insecure men. No vision. No compassion.
— Zarah Sultana MP (@zarahsultana) July 16, 2025
Meanwhile, three more Labour MPs have also been punished:
Three more MPs have been punished in a different way by having their trade envoy roles removed
– Rosena Allin Khan
– Bell Ribeiro-Addy
– Mohammed Yasin https://t.co/UsIRQsTUmF— Serena Barker-Singh (@serenabarksing) July 16, 2025
Starmer, facing what his inner circle denounced as “persistent rebels,” is accused of muzzling principled voices rather than addressing the genuine moral concerns driving the defiance. These MPs had voted to block DWP cuts chronically ill and disabled claimants of Universal Credit – and initially, Personal Independence Payment (PIP).
The herd of dissenting MPs compelled Labour to reverse its punitive DWP proposals—cutting from two sides only to end up abandoning key PIP restrictions entirely. Yet instead of praising their courage, Starmer chose to discipline them. Detractors call this “desperate and pathetic,” a move aimed at stifling dissent rather than fostering genuine policy debate.
High-stakes
It wasn’t low-stakes: disability charities, public figures, and more than a hundred Labour MPs—including Sadiq Khan—had joined forces to oppose the reforms. Tens of thousands feared the DWP cuts would push disabled families into poverty, exacerbate health crises, and even risk lives.
Yet instead of listening, Starmer’s leadership issued a straight-line whip: support the reforms—or lose your status. It’s a move that’s authoritarian, not principled. Critics within Labour warn this risks muting the very voices that once defined the party’s progressive core .
Starmer’s message appears clear: loyalty to leadership matters more than loyalty to disabled people reliant on the DWP. He’s signalling that internal pressure from MPs—even on moral issues—is unwelcome.
Meanwhile, the U-turn he was forced into feels less like political humility and more like capitulation followed by punishment for those who stood firm.
Starmer’s heavy-handed response isn’t just about disciplining MPs—it signals zero tolerance for dissent within his own ranks, even on core social justice and DWP issues. Also, if Labour voices are penalised for standing up to protect disabled people how can the public trust its welfare commitments?
Plus, Starmer’s obsession with discipline now seems to clash with Labour’s core identity—one of empathy, solidarity, and governance rooted in humanity.
Authoritarianism vs DWP claimants
So, what should have been an opportunity for Starmer to highlight a principled stand by his MPs has instead revealed a readiness to suppress dissent in favour of centralised control. By punishing those who stood with disabled people, Starmer undermines both democratic process and moral authority.
Featured image via the Canary













How many MPs started the Social Democrats back in 1981 when they left a Labour Party that ideologically was almost the reverse of the current one? Oh yeah, FOUR. Time to get the ball rolling for a progressive party in the Commons to take on the miserable status quo.
DWP cuts fallout continues as Zarah Sultana slams
Starmer over four MPs losing the whip.
Q-1
Mr Starmer why are you GAGING our elected M.P. and making them leave the party are you culling the staff of the Labour party now to
Pay for your dodgy Party policy Y-N?
Well, it’s good to see our new elected M.P. looking after residents’ concerns NOT their party leaders mess or bad policy in LONDON.
It’s about time all party M.P. did the job we public put them in Govt jobs to do which is look after our needs Not their party needs in the U.K. and stopped voting to fund wars or other countries needs with in the E.U. and including the U.S. that is possibly about to fall apart now under Trump rule.
Voter come local area voting soon on its way for new Mayor -Cllr
Of Lancashire take note of the parties leader in Govt now that are trying to GAG their M.P. way of voting and place your vote with a party that lets your elected M.P. vote freely their way to help your needs in your area you vote for.
Also, I will State this why is it just one person (the Whips) of all parties can strip our elected M.P. of having a vote on their party policy if our elected M.P. cannot vote for us public in H.O. Com
what is the point of one person running the voting way a whip that was Not voted for by a public vote Whips are just puppet for No10 and should be scrapped no one person as a right to rig the voting on policy made by any Govt party that our elected M.P. DO-NOT agree with the party policy M.P. are elected to serve us public Not a Whip or dodgy party leaders bad policy that trash our way of life.