PM snubs call to axe powerful No10 chief Morgan McSweeney after welfare backlash
THE PM'S powerful chief of staff Morgan McSweeney is 'not going anywhere' No10 declared - despite calls for him to be sacked over the welfare fiasco.
Keir Starmer is battling to shore up his grip on power after being forced to massively water down benefits cuts in the latest screeching U-turn.
4
4
4
Rebel Labour MPs blame Mr McSweeney for the row and had demanded the PM sack the senior aide as part of a 'regime change' in No10.
One rumour circulating among a small and well connected group of Labour figures suggested Mr McSweeney was fed up with No10 and wanted to leave.
He was planning to return to Labour HQ to lead the party's campaigns and elections team - heading up the fight to beat Reform in 2029, according to a source close to No10.
But last night Downing Street insisted the PM's Svengali is going nowhere.
A No10 source said: 'Tittle tattle about a change to chief of staff is uninformed nonsense.
'He isn't going anywhere.'
Ministers are confident they will get their benefits legislation over the line on Tuesday after 126 Labour MPs tried to derail plans.
But they are braced for a significant rebellion with lefty MPs plotting a fresh bid to try and kill the bill.
'It's a mutinous atmosphere,' one Labour MP said. 'There could be 70 of us still against this legislation.'
4
One Government insider said: 'MPs are furious because they feel like they weren't being listened to. The question is, can No10 put that anger back in the box?'
The climbdown over benefits and a U-turn on winter fuel means Chancellor Rachel Reeves must find £4.5billion.
A Labour MP fumed: 'We can't keep making these U-turns every time we make a big decision. It's so expensive.'
Helen Whately Shadow Pensions Secretary
Every day it becomes clearer that this is a government without a plan and without any idea about how to run the country.
Welfare is one of the most important challenges facing Britain. But still, Keir Starmer has no answers.
The chickens of his deeply incompetent time in office are coming home to roost.
He is being held hostage in Number 10 by the Parliamentary Labour Party.
Having been forced into yet another humiliating U-turn, it is clear he is no longer in control. His authority is completely shot.
That's because socialist Labour MPs don't believe in lower spending. Ever since Labour took office, they have been itching to spend more.
From day one, they handed out billion-pound bungs to the union barons who bankroll their party.
But that is not what the situation requires. After the pandemic, there has been a drastic expansion of people dependent on the welfare state, and it is set to reach boiling point.
With 2,000 people being signed off work for good a day, spending on sickness benefits is set to rise to £100 billion by 2030. We cannot afford to support a country the size of Panama on benefits.
But even so, this week's omnishambles makes clear Labour MPs are not comfortable with the tighter spending this desperate situation requires.
Labour's changes would have seen this dented by £5 billion.
It sounds like a lot, but in the context of £100 billion it is a drop in the ocean. We need our government to be a lot more ambitious on welfare spending, not less.
What we need is a focus on getting young people into work. Labour has made that harder too, by destroying jobs and opportunities for people across the country.
If they can't even deliver this paltry plan paltry for savings from a spiralling welfare bill, we don't have a chance. Britain deserves better.
Diane Abbott said Sir Keir should be more like Tony Blair and take the left seriously.
In a sign of more rows to come, she told BBC Radio 4: 'Starmer and his people thought they could dismiss Labour MPs, well they know differently now.'
In a speech to Welsh Labour on Saturday the PM said fixing the 'broken' welfare system must be done in a 'Labour way'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
30 minutes ago
- BBC News
Stroud park charges idea would 'put off' businesses
Businesses which use a park for professional activities, such as dog walking and personal training, say they would be put off from using the space if they were is one of the proposals included in Stroud District Council's (SDC) Stratford Park Vision and Ambition Development Plan, which sets out how to protect the space for future generations while encouraging more people to use it.A council spokesperson said blanket business charges were "at an early stage and required further development", and any revenue generated would be "reinvested in the park".But yoga teacher Oli Raeburn said "the whole beauty of having an outdoor space like the park is that it's free". The document states the authority does not know how many businesses currently use the Gloucestershire report author said charges could help cover the cost of any damage done to the space through commercial use and ensure proper insurance practices are in local authorities in England charge companies to use parks to contribute towards maintenance costs. But Ms Raeburn, who owns Yogi Oli and has run community yoga sessions in the park for six years, said any potential charges would make her think twice about using the site."It would massively impact me, especially as my classes [in the park] are donation-based," she said."As it's a community project, it would put me off using the park as it would make it less accessible."The whole beauty of having an outdoor space like the park is that it's free."Ed Mobs uses the park for his EM Power personal training bootcamp sessions."I would have to look for a different location as my business wouldn't be able to absorb the cost."It just wouldn't be viable for me," he contrast, Stroud residents have mixed views on the proposed levy. Colin Weston, who walks his dog in the park, said: "If it was for a business then I have no problem with that. The council's got to make money too."Park user, Charles Moore, added: "I think that parks have changed over the years and many years ago they were just places for recreation, but I think it's reasonable to expect people if they're using them for their businesses to make a contribution."But Eric Wilkinson believes no one should be charged to use the space. "I think it would be a retrograde step. It is a beautiful park which is open and accessible to so many people and it needs to be kept free and open to all," he said. Cinema and festivals The Stratford Park Vision and Ambition Development Plan was endorsed by councillors at a SDC meeting on 19 June and the strategy is set to run until report states the new strategy aims to make the park a "destination location" for communities to improve "health and well-being" and provide "cultural enrichment for all".Ideas put forward include creating "green way" corridors to connect the park to other open spaces in Stroud, hosting open air cinema and music festivals, launching a forest school and expanding the skate park and sensory a statement, a SDC spokesperson said: "The Stratford Park Development Plan provides a framework for officers to explore the park's full potential, drawing on ideas through extensive stakeholder consultations."Some proposals, including the introduction of business charges for commercial use, remain at an early stage and require further development."The next step will involve benchmarking similar practices in other districts."Any revenue generated would be reinvested in the park to support its ongoing improvement and ensure it continues to benefit all users."The plan has been described as a "framework" document, and the council will bring forward set proposals in the future, which will be consulted and voted on.
BBC News
30 minutes ago
- BBC News
South West drink producers embrace low-alcohol revolution
Drink producers across the South West are benefiting from a boost in sales of alcohol-free and no-alcohol products are the fastest-growing category across the UK, according to the British Beer and Pub Association (BBPA).Tarquin's Cornish Gin, in Wadebridge, now sells 10,000 bottles of zero-alcohol gin a year - about 2% of their annual overall Brewery, in Princetown, Devon, said it was investing in equipment to brew alcohol-free beer. 'Younger generation' The BBPA said the industry had adapted to changing habits with more than 425,000 bulk barrels of no and low-alcoholic beer, equivalent to 120 million pints, sold in is up 14% on 2022, when more than 370,000 bulk barrels were no and low-alcohol category continues to grow at a rapid rate year-on-year with 86% of pubs now serving a no and low-alcohol option, according to the BBPA. Ruth Huxley, managing director of the Great Cornish Food Store in Truro, said: "It is a real burgeoning part of the drinks industry, for sure."There is a lot of interest in drinking less alcohol, particularly for the younger generation."The industry has reacted and is producing more variety and a better quality of product."We have to respond to market demands." Southwestern Distillery, which makes Tarquin's Gin, launched a zero-alcohol gin-style drink last year."We sold 10,000 bottles last year... so it's a small but rapidly growing part of the business," said Sean Blackburn, strategic growth manager for Southwestern Distillery."It took us three years to perfect the recipe and there were certainly plenty of mistakes."Alcohol has a taste to it [that is] difficult to mimic but we are really proud of the drink."If you look to places like Germany and The Netherlands their low-alcohol beers and sprits are around 10% of the market so it looks like there's going to be a lot of growth." Steve Post, sales manager at Dartmoor Brewery, said the company was currently using a third-party company to brew its zero-alcohol product."But we are investing a lot of money into getting the equipment to make it here," he said."A few years ago the low-alcohol products didn't exist but now they are much better."I've done several blind tastings with people and most can't tell the difference between the zero-alcohol product and the real beer."
BBC News
31 minutes ago
- BBC News
'I'm British but I can't live in my own country with my partner'
The UK government is facing calls to scrap an immigration policy which puts "untold stress" on British citizens who choose to marry or cohabit with someone from and settled residents wanting to sponsor their partner's visa application must earn a minimum income of £29,000 or have savings of £88, in Bristol and Stroud are urging the government to scrap the requirement which was brought in by the Conservatives to curb migration."What the government does next will make or break many families who just want to be together," said Caroline Coombs of the campaign group Reunite Families UK.A Home Office spokesperson said the minimum income policy "needs to balance a respect for family life while also maintaining the UK's economic stability" and it is considering findings from a Migration Advisory Committee review. For Rebecca Gray, 32, from Stroud in Gloucestershire, scrapping the policy would mean she could move back to the UK with her Turkish husband."I don't think people have any idea of how much harm the visa rules cause," she with a UK business but unable to meet the minimum income requirement, she has been living in Turkey for the past four with her husband, Baran, 31, they have been saving to apply for a visa through the savings said: "We're holding off having children because we've been so focused on saving money to get him a visa."Ms Gray said the couple has stronger family ties to the UK as her husband has lost both of his parents."We want to be close to family. Between us, we only have one parent left, that's my mum. "I'm forced to live thousands of miles away from my family if I want to be with my husband."Some countries, like the UK, set a minimum income requirement for a spouse while other countries, like France and the Netherlands, align it to their national minimum wage, the UK sets it at a higher Migration Observatory estimates that roughly half of the UK working population earn under £29,000. 'My kids think I'm the man in the phone' For a large number of applicants, the minimum income policy is not the only financial fees and NHS surcharges can cost more than £7,000 for a five-year route to settlement, excluding any legal fees."It's unfair that only the wealthy can bring their partner here," said Leighton Allen, from Worcester. Mr Allen, 30, works in retail and said he cannot meet the salary threshold to bring his Tanzanian fiancée and his two young children to the said he tries to see them as much as possible, which can be three weeks in a year."All I want is to be a father to my children but I feel that choice is taken away from me. I'm financially supporting them but they don't see me."He added: "They think I'm in the man in the phone."The minimum income requirement was first introduced in 2012 to ensure the British partner or settled resident earned enough to financially support their foreign partner in the UK without resorting to public funds. Last year, the salary threshold increased for the first time, from £18,600 to £29,000. 'I can't come home to care for my parents' Following Brexit and the end of free movement between the UK and EU countries, some British citizens who had been living abroad - like Sarah Douglas - are also finding it hard to return to the UK with their 42-year-old lives in Italy with her husband Matteo and their three wants to move back home to Scotland with her family to be close to her elderly parents, and help care for to follow the minimum income route, Ms Douglas would need to return without her Italian husband and accrue six months of UK payslips to apply for a spouse visa for him. "I could work as a teacher in the UK and my husband is a software engineer who would find work easily. "We're financially stable, we don't rely on any support, but we're able to do that because we're together," she avoid separation, they have been struggling to save £88,500 in order to apply via the savings route."Saving this much money is putting financial strain on us and it's taking years, but we feel it's our only option."She added: "If we were forced to separate, it would have a huge impact on us as a family. I've seen what that does to children and I don't want to put my children through that."A report by children's charity Coram found children in separated families showed signs of stress, anxiety and inability to focus in school. It also said that children living in families affected by the current minimum income requirement were likely to experience exacerbated challenges and poor mental report was commissioned by Reunite Families UK, a not-for-profit representing families affected by the UK family visa co-founder and executive director, Caroline Coombs, said: "We have nearly 6,000 couples and families who are suffering on a daily basis."People feel completely unheard by their own government and they can't understand why they can't be here with their loved ones," she added. Earlier this month, the Home Office said it would examine findings from a Migration Advisory Committee review and issue a response in due experts suggested lowering the current threshold and gave a number of possible said, for example, lowering it to £24,000 would help ease family reunification and increase net migration by roughly 1-3%.A Home Office spokesperson said: "We understand the Minimum Income Requirement for family visas needs to balance a respect for family life while also maintaining the UK's economic stability, which is why the Home Secretary commissioned the independent Migration Advisory Committee to undertake a review."We are now considering its findings and will respond in due course." Migration is 'too high' Conservative MP for Kent, Katie Lam, who is opposition assistant whip, defended an increase in the minimum income requirement."Migration has been far too high for the last two decades and remains so," she said."The public has consistently asked successive governments to lower migration. "The last (Conservative) government promised to do exactly this, but like the governments before it, it did not deliver it."At a parliamentary debate about the family visa income requirement in January, she said: "The question is not should British citizens be able to bring their foreign spouses to the UK. "The question is, does it benefit the country as a whole for British citizens on lower salaries to bring foreign spouses here who are unable to get a visa any other way?"But co-leader of the Green Party and Bristol Central MP, Carla Denyer, who has called the minimum income requirement a 'tax on love', - and wants it scrapped."The Home Office is failing not just people who are moving to the UK but British people who already live here and just want to enjoy family life in peace," she said. "The minimum income requirement puts untold stress on couples and families and it should be scrapped entirely."Family doctor and Labour MP for Stroud, Simon Opher, sponsored an exhibition in the Houses of Parliament last week which showcased the human impact of the family visa rules. "We're splitting up people who love each other, splitting families who are the bedrock of our society, and I think it's the wrong policy," he said.
