PM ‘incapable of sticking to a decision' after welfare U-turn
In a speech to the Local Government Association Annual Conference in Liverpool on Wednesday, Ms Badenoch will criticise Sir Keir for creating a 'punishing welfare trap that shuts people out of going back to work'.
The Labour party is 'making everything worse', she will say (Stefan Rousseau/PA)
'This week, the Prime Minister backed down on limited reforms that would have made modest reductions to the ballooning welfare bill,' she will say.
'He was too weak to hold the line.
'The result? A punishing welfare trap that shuts people out of going back to work.
'Right now, Labour are making everything worse. And Keir Starmer sums up exactly what's wrong with politics today.
'Now that his backbenchers smell blood, there's almost certainly another climb down on the two-child benefit cap in the offing.
'Labour told us 'the adults were back in charge', but this is actually amateur hour. The Prime Minister is incapable of sticking to a decision.
'If he can't make relatively small savings to a benefits bill that is set to exceed £100 billion by 2030, how can we expect him to meet his promised 5% defence spending, or ever take the tough decisions necessary to bring down the national debt?'
On Saturday, the Prime Minister told the Welsh Labour conference the 'broken' welfare system must be fixed 'in a Labour way'.
In a speech to the Welsh Labour conference, he said: 'We cannot take away the safety net that vulnerable people rely on, and we won't, but we also can't let it become a snare for those who can and want to work,' the Prime Minister said.
'Everyone agrees that our welfare system is broken: failing people every day, a generation of young people written off for good and the cost spiralling out of control.
'Fixing it is a moral imperative, but we need to do it in a Labour way.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
25 minutes ago
- Sky News
Ex-Tory minister George Freeman refers himself to standards watchdog over 'cash for questions' accusations
A former Tory minister has referred himself to the parliamentary watchdog following allegations he was paid by a company that helped him write questions to government. George Freeman, the MP for Norfolk, is reported by The Times to have submitted queries to Labour ministers about the sector the firm operates in. The newspaper published what it said were leaked emails that showed exchanges in which Mr Freeman had asked the company's director what to ask about as he prepared written parliamentary questions related to space data and emissions tracking. Written parliamentary questions can be tabled by any MP and are a common way of requesting more information from a minister in a certain department. Mr Freeman, who reportedly tabled the questions to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, became a paid adviser with GHGSat, a monitoring service for greenhouse gas emissions, in April last year. The appointments watchdog Acoba advised him that in taking up the role, "there are risks associated with your influence and network of contacts gained whilst in ministerial office". "In particular, this is a company that is interested in government policy and decisions relating to the civil space sector and emissions," the watchdog said. "You noted you have made it clear to the company that you will not lobby government on its behalf, and this will not form part of your role." In a statement, Mr Freeman said he did not believe he had done "anything wrong" but that he was referring himself to the standards commissioner. "As a longstanding advocate of important new technologies, companies and industries, working cross-party through APPGs and the select committee, I regularly ask experts for clarification on technical points and terminology, and deeply respect and try to assiduously follow the code of conduct for MPs and the need to act always in the public interest," he said. "Throughout my 15 years in parliament (and government) I have always understood the need to be transparent in the work I have done for and with commercial clients and charities and am always willing to answer any criticism. "I don't believe I have done anything wrong but I am immediately referring myself to the parliamentary commissioner for standards and will accept his judgment in due course." He added: "I am very concerned at the unauthorised and targeted access to my emails and diary which I have raised with the police and parliamentary authorities." A Conservative Party spokesperson said: "George Freeman MP has referred himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. "It would be inappropriate for the Conservative Party to comment further whilst the commissioner's inquiries are ongoing." The Lib Dems and Labour called on Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch to suspend him, saying the incident bore a resemblance to the cash for questions scandal that engulfed John Major's leadership in the 1990s. A Labour spokesperson said: "Cash for questions was a hallmark of Tory sleaze in the 1990s, and three decades on the same issue has raised its head again. "George Freeman has referred himself for investigation so now Kemi Badenoch must suspend him from the Tory whip." Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader Daisy Cooper added: "This looks like the same old sleaze and scandal people have come to expect from the Conservative Party. "Kemi Badenoch should immediately suspend the whip from George Freeman while this is investigated. "Failure to act would confirm that even after being booted out of government, the Conservatives are still hopelessly out of touch."
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
After a dreadful first year, Starmer has no hope of fixing the economy
This Friday is the anniversary of Labour's victory at the polls, presenting us with an opportunity to assess Sir Keir Starmer's first year in office. I cannot comment on foreign affairs or domestic social issues. My bailiwick is simply the economy and the Government's influence over it. If a week is a long time in politics, then a year is a short time in the life of an economy. It is perfectly possible for things that have started badly to turn out well in the end and, equally, for things that started well to turn sour. So a judgment this early in a government's tenure must be provisional. We should start by acknowledging all the difficulties the Government has faced. It inherited a low-growth economy, accompanied by a serious fiscal problem. Notably, a deficit of nearly 5pc of GDP and a debt ratio not far off 100pc, and still climbing. Moreover, given the continuing war between Russia and Ukraine, and especially since Donald Trump's return to the White House in January, the international environment has not been favourable. With all that said, how has the Government done? Long ago, Labour's leaders acknowledged that the fundamental problem of the British economy was low economic growth, associated with weak productivity growth. They identified a low rate of national investment as the most important driver. Accordingly, much of Labour's wish list has been about increasing the rate of investment. It has undertaken a number of measures, including redefining the fiscal rules, to enable a higher rate of public investment. The effects of this change have not yet come through. And it has sought to reduce the planning obstructions to building more houses. As regards business investment, however, its approach so far has been woeful. It seems to have believed that, after the leadership chaos and infighting of the last 14 years, merely by not being Conservative, the new Labour Government would engender greater confidence. Things have turned out rather differently. For a start, the underlying problems were always more serious than Labour's diagnosis acknowledged. Moreover, the gloom and doom about the ' fiscal black hole ' relentlessly pumped out by the Chancellor didn't help develop any sense of optimism among business leaders. Then there were three key mistakes. The first was committed more or less immediately after taking office by caving in to the striking rail workers. This gave a green light to other militant groups to act, and it will surely take a long time for the Government to restore any sense of confidence that it will firmly resist militant union pay demands. In a similar vein, it conceded to junior doctors and thereby, in all likelihood, set off a wave of claims and industrial disputes across the public sector. Second, having boxed itself in with a pre-election commitment not to raise the main rates of personal tax and yet feeling that it had to increase some sort of tax to fund its increased spending, the Government then imposed a huge increase in business taxes in the form of increased National Insurance contributions for employers. Moreover, this came on top of a large increase in the minimum wage. To cap it all, the Government is in the process of getting the Employment Rights Bill through Parliament. This will greatly strengthen the bargaining position of workers against their employers. Many small businesses, in particular, are fearful that they will be in a weak position to stand up against rogue employees. It is hardly surprising, therefore, that business leaders feel depressed and are disinclined to invest or take on employees. Ultimately, it seems Labour really doesn't seem to appreciate the private sector or understand what makes businesses tick. Simultaneously, the Government has failed to understand the nature and scale of the problem concerning the public finances. Admittedly, most Labour Party supporters seem to think that we can increase the share of GDP accounted for by government expenditure without incurring any ill effects. Yet anyone reviewing the international evidence will conclude that government spending taking as high a share of GDP as it currently does is doing grave damage. One of the most important drivers of surging public spending is the ballooning benefits bill. Admittedly, the Government has made a nod in this direction by announcing various measures to combat the inexorable rise in welfare spending. But these measures have been pitifully small in scope. They amounted only to a total saving of some £6bn, compared to a projected total welfare bill (including pensions) this year of £326bn. Moreover, the Government has already retreated on some of its proposals. It may be about to abandon the rest of them this week. If you want to be optimistic, you could say that it is still early days. Even Margaret Thatcher's first year in office in 1979/80 was very far from an economic success story. Indeed, she began by agreeing to the pay recommendations of the Clegg Commission on public sector pay (no, not that Clegg). And her monetarist obsession caused interest rates to be jacked up from 12pc to 17pc, prompting the pound to soar and much of the British economy to go down the tubes. The economy picked up two years later, but it didn't really start to motor until after Thatcher's second election victory in 1983. Somehow, though, I don't see this Government's dire beginning leading to any sort of major recovery, let alone a Damascene conversion. With a tailwind from the international environment, things may get a bit better next year. But any sort of economic transformation looks unattainable. In that case, Labour's other aspirations will fall by the wayside. Meanwhile, the Government somehow has to find the wisdom to appreciate the peril that this country faces from foreign aggression – and to muster the political courage to spend what is necessary to defend us against it.
ITV News
an hour ago
- ITV News
George Freeman, MP for Mid Norfolk, refers himself to watchdog over 'cash for questions' allegations
The Conservative MP for Mid Norfolk has referred himself to the parliamentary watchdog after he was accused of taking money to ask questions of government on behalf of a private company. The Times reported that George Freeman broke multiple rules set out in the MP's code of conduct, including lobbying on behalf of a private company. The report alleged that he was paid by firm that helped him write questions which were submitted to Labour ministers. The newspaper published what it said were leaked emails that showed exchanges in which Mr Freeman had asked the company's director what to ask about as he prepared written parliamentary questions related to space data and emissions tracking. He reportedly tabled the questions, which are a way for MPs to ask for more information on the policies and activities of government departments, to the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology and the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. He became a paid adviser with GHGSat, a monitoring service for greenhouse gas emissions, in April last year. The appointments watchdog Acoba advised him that in taking up the role, 'there are risks associated with your influence and network of contacts gained whilst in ministerial office'. 'In particular, this is a company that is interested in government policy and decisions relating to the civil space sector and emissions. 'You noted you have made it clear to the company that you will not lobby government on its behalf, and this will not form part of your role.' Mr Freeman told the Times: 'As a longstanding advocate of important new technologies, companies and industries, working cross-party through APPGs (All-Party Parliamentary Groups) and the select committee, I regularly ask experts for clarification on technical points and terminology, and deeply respect and try to assiduously follow the code of conduct for MPs and the need to act always in the public interest. 'Throughout my 15 years in parliament (and government), I have always understood the need to be transparent in the work I have done for and with commercial clients and charities and am always willing to answer any criticism. 'I don't believe I have done anything wrong but I am immediately referring myself to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards and will accept his judgment in due course.' Mr Freeman and GHGSat have been contacted for comment. A Conservative Party spokesperson said: 'George Freeman MP has referred himself to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner. 'It would be inappropriate for the Conservative Party to comment further whilst the Commissioner's inquiries are ongoing.' The Lib Dems and Labour called for Tory leader Kemi Badenoch to suspend him. A Labour spokesperson said: 'Cash for questions was a hallmark of Tory sleaze in the 1990s, and three decades on the same issue has raised its head again. 'George Freeman has referred himself for investigation so now Kemi Badenoch must suspend him from the Tory whip.' Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader Daisy Cooper MP said: 'This looks like the same old sleaze and scandal people have come to expect from the Conservative Party. 'Kemi Badenoch should immediately suspend the whip from George Freeman while this is investigated. 'Failure to act would confirm that even after being booted out of government, the Conservatives are still hopelessly out of touch.' The MP for Mid Norfolk is currently on the science, innovation and technology committee and a trade envoy. He was responsible for the UK space agency in his previous role as a minister in the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology under Rishi Sunak.
