A heated debate erupted on GB News as host Michelle Jubé discussed the revelation that 1.5 million migrants in the UK are on benefits, fueling anger among British taxpayers. The panel, including Reform UK’s Ben Habib and former Labour advisor Paul Richards, delved into concerns over government spending priorities, the strained social contract, and the increasing disillusionment of voters.
Michelle Jubé opened the discussion by addressing the growing discontent among British citizens who feel sidelined in favor of policies that prioritize foreign nationals over hardworking taxpayers. She emphasized the case of Waspi women—millions of women born in the 1950s who feel betrayed after changes to the pension age without adequate warning.
Jubé stated:
“Pensioners are sitting in cold homes under blankets, while we send millions overseas and house migrants in luxury accommodations. What happened to charity beginning at home?”
Ben Habib supported this sentiment, pointing to systemic failures and what he called “habitual breaches of the social contract.”
“We’ve got 1.5 million migrants on benefits, costing taxpayers £5 billion a year, and illegal migrants costing another £8 billion. Meanwhile, Waspi women and pensioners are left out in the cold. It’s all about choices, and this government consistently chooses others over its own citizens.”
Habib also highlighted spending on international projects, including £35 million for Ukraine and £50 million allocated to foreign humanitarian efforts, arguing that these decisions deepen public resentment
Paul Richards defended Labour’s spending priorities, stating that the party is committed to protecting the NHS, maintaining the triple lock on pensions, and addressing long-term issues like waiting lists and policing.
“Liz Kendall’s decision not to compensate Waspi women reflects the reality of governing. Governments face hard choices, and Labour inherited a financial mess. But pensioners will benefit from the triple lock and increased NHS funding.”
However, Richards’ remarks were met with skepticism. Jubé and Habib criticized Labour’s allocation of resources, arguing that British taxpayers and pensioners are being overlooked.
The discussion turned to Westminster Council’s video promoting social housing in multiple languages, highlighting that 48% of social housing in London is occupied by foreign nationals. Jubé and the panel pointed out that this further alienates British citizens, especially veterans and low-income families struggling to access housing.
Habib expressed outrage:
“We’re providing luxury accommodations in Westminster for migrants while veterans sleep on the streets. This is a direct betrayal of the British people.”
Adam Brooks, another guest, added:
“Walk through parts of London, and it doesn’t feel like Britain anymore. People are frustrated because their taxes fund this—while they can’t even get basic support themselves.”
Jubé shared feedback from viewers, with many expressing frustration at broken promises and a sense of abandonment. One viewer wrote:
“Why are we constantly giving money abroad while pensioners freeze at home? Charity should begin at home.”
Another said:
“The social contract is dead. I’ve paid into the system my whole life, but when I need help, the support isn’t there.”
The panel debated whether public trust in institutions like the NHS and police remains intact. While Richards argued that most Brits still support these institutions, Jubé and Habib contended that failures to deliver on promises are eroding confidence.
The debate underscored growing concerns about governance and spending priorities. Habib argued that systemic issues, from unchecked immigration to inefficient public spending, have led to widespread disillusionment:
“The British people are losing faith in their government and institutions. It’s not just about money—it’s about trust. That trust has been shattered.”
Richards countered that Labour is working to rebuild this trust by focusing on core issues like healthcare and public safety.
“We’re committed to addressing long-term problems and ensuring a fairer society for everyone.”
As the conversation continued, Jubé summed up the public sentiment:
“People are tired of being let down. They want their government to prioritize them—not send billions abroad or house migrants in luxury. The social contract may not be dead yet, but it’s hanging by a thread.”
With growing public anger and frustration, the debate over spending priorities and governance is unlikely to subside anytime soon. As both major parties face scrutiny, the question remains: Will they address these concerns, or risk further alienating the electorate?
