Rachel Reeves is reportedly considering a 2p increase in income tax, taking the basic rate from 20 to 22 per cent. That might seem modest by historic standards, yet it would be a clear breach of Labour’s manifesto promise, made just over a year ago, not to raise any of the big three taxes. More importantly, it underscores the scale of the structural pressures facing Britain’s public finances – pressures that cannot be addressed by minor tax tweaks alone. If Reeves truly wants to strengthen Britain’s economic foundations, she should turn her attention to welfare reform – not as a matter of cruelty but of common sense.

Britain’s welfare state has grown not only too large but indulgent, drifting from necessity into comfort

When William Beveridge published his famous report in 1942, he imagined a state that would slay five giants: want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. His ambition was humane but modest – to guarantee a subsistence standard of living for those who fell on hard times. The state would provide a safety net, not a hammock.

Eighty years on, the welfare state he inspired has been swollen far beyond his conception. It now attempts to cushion almost every discomfort of modern life and has become inefficient and unsustainable.

After the war, the welfare state’s initial success was undeniable. The creation of the NHS (in its then limited form), the expansion of public education and the introduction of national insurance helped rebuild a nation battered by conflict. But over time, that success bred complacency – a creeping sense that the state, rather than the citizen, should carry primary responsibility when things go wrong. By the 1970s, welfare provision had metastasised into a vast intricate bureaucracy, addressing not only destitution but almost ever conceivable ‘need’.

Today, the United Kingdom........

© The Spectator