An Afghan asylum-seeker chugging across the English Channel at eight knots, an Australian nearing retirement, and the parent of a child with special needs have something in common. Each knows more than the British state thinks they do.
The British government has long assumed people are, in general, ignorant about the state’s obligations. Increasingly, the opposite is the norm: people know too much. The knowledge comes from peculiar sources. TikTok is a font of information for people trying to claim asylum. Reddit forums, such as r/DWPhelp, offer expert guidance to people navigating the Department for Work and Pensions. Memes about welfare entitlements, shared on WhatsApp and Facebook (which is increasingly an old-people’s home), cut through better than any government campaign. What happens when people are savvier than the state assumes?
Some consequences are mixed. Governments have long struggled to sign up old people to pension credit, which tops up the income of elderly poor folk. Until recently, a third of qualifying pensioners did not apply for something worth up to £4,300 ($5,600) a year. Labour’s decision to scrap the less valuable winter-fuel allowance (worth about £300) for everyone except those on pension credit changed that. A flurry of cross-generational social-media cajoling meant that, this time, pensioners actually signed up for free money. About 235,000 people applied for pension credit in the wake of the announcement, up 81% from the same period the previous year. Cutting winter-fuel allowance was a cost-saving measure. It will now save fewer costs.
Other consequences are negative. When unlikely loopholes appear, they go viral. Britain is tweaking its rules on making backdated national-insurance contributions to qualify for a pension. This has caused ructions in, of all places, Australia. A three-year stint working in Britain—common enough among Australians—is enough to qualify for a portion of a state pension, if someone is willing to make seven years of backdated contributions for a few thousand pounds in total. Given that a state pension is worth at least £3,000 per year from retirement, it is a good deal. How-to guides were splashed over Instagram. Up to 2m people could qualify, even if few are likely to apply. It is not fraud; it is people claiming entitlements when few thought they would.
Relying on ignorance about entitlements has long been a tool of the British state. When it comes to asylum, it no longer works. Asylum-seekers in Calais have an intricate knowledge of both Britain’s and the EU’s asylum system. Again, the knowledge stems from the same sources: on TikTok smugglers advertise their services, while advice on the ins and outs of the British asylum system circulates freely on messaging apps. Britain, like much of Europe, introduced generous asylum obligations in the expectation that few people would come. Now lots do.
Low take-up is the secret sauce of many British benefits. It means the British state can, at times, be generous. Under the Motability scheme, disabled people can swap a mobility allowance worth about £75 a week for a car. Thanks to various government subsidies and guarantees—since the government pays Motability directly, its cost of borrowing is low while it is vat-exempt—it is a bargain. A BMW i4 costs about £650 a month from a normal leasing company; it is half that on Motability. About 815,000 people use Motability. Another 1.6m people are entitled to it. Some prefer the cash. Plenty of others simply do not yet know what good value the scheme is. Thanks to TikTok, Reddit and X, they soon will.
What happens when everyone tries to claim what they are owed? Special-needs provision is an unhappy example. Education, Health and Care plans allow parents to claim benefits worth tens of thousands if their child has learning difficulties. The number of children on plans has risen from under 240,000 in 2014 to nearly 600,000 in 2024. Partly, this is due to an increase in cases. Often, it is awareness. People have realised help is on offer. They are guided on their way by a slew of advice, from Reddit to Mumsnet, an influential messageboard, to TikTok. The result? About 20 councils are at risk of bankruptcy solely from special-needs provision.
A welfare run
Debates around the generosity of the British state become lost in allegations of fraud. Only a fraction of people are gaming the system. Reducing the state’s obligations to people who are in genuine need is the only option to save proper money. It is also the most painful. Of all the steps taken by the Labour government so far, cutting disability benefits by £5bn has been the most poisonous. Originally, it was supposed to save £8bn. The Office for Budget Responsibility thought it would save barely half that, as people work around the system. TikTok is not easy to overpower.
If people are savvier about dealing with the state, then perhaps it is because they are more cynical about its future. About a third of people do not think there will be a pension in 30 years’ time, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. That creates an incentive for people to take what they can today. It is similar to a bank run: people do not think the state can live up to its obligations tomorrow, so people withdraw all they can today. A welfare run is under way.
Stemming it leads to ugly choices. The government can slash more obligations—whether to pensioners, the disabled or asylum-seekers—or it can find ways to pay for what it has promised. Given its fiscal position, this means one thing: higher taxes. When challenged by an activist about Labour’s drift to the right, Tony Blair replied: “It’s worse than you think, I actually believe it.” The same formulation works for the obligations of the British state: it’s worse than you think, people are actually entitled to them. Now, thanks to TikTok, Reddit and their ilk, they know they are. ■ Subscribers to The Economist can sign up to our Opinion newsletter, which brings together the best of our leaders, columns, guest essays and reader correspondence.