Calling the rape gangs a ‘dog whistle' issue is utterly disgraceful
When journalist Tim Montgomerie (full disclosure: the founder of ConservativeHome, where I work) made a reasonable point about the dangers of allowing oversensitivity to community cohesion to trump things like child protection, as it had in places such as Rotherham, Powell said this:
'Oh, you want to blow that little trumpet now, do you? Let's get that dog whistle out, shall we, yeah?'
Perhaps, like Sir Keir Starmer, she would have been more comfortable talking about Adolescence, the recent smash-hit fictional drama about a crime which, as seen in the show, has never taken place.
The Prime Minister spent weeks happily playing an unpaid role in Netflix's publicity campaign, referring to the series as a 'documentary' and calling for it to be shown in schools. Yet he refused to be interviewed for Channel 4's actual documentary Groomed: A National Scandal, nor has he even confirmed he watched it.
Powell is not some random backbencher. As Leader of the House of Commons, she's an important minister in this Labour Government.
But perhaps therefore her outburst should not surprise us, for Starmer's ministers have given no impression so much as that they just wish the rape gangs scandal would go away.
Why else would they be fighting tooth and nail against calls for a proper national enquiry? Or more targeted investigations such as into specific allegations of collusions between the gangs and local police forces, as called for by Conservative MP Nick Timothy.
Politicians normally love holding inquiries. In this country they're so slow and so expensive that they've become the preferred way for ministers to look like they're taking action whilst kicking an issue into the long grass.
Not here though. Labour insists that the existing inquiries have been sufficient. But again, Powell showed what they really think: the case Montgomerie was making on any questions, which she dismissed as a 'dog whistle'? Literally just the conclusions of the 2014 Jay Report.
It isn't difficult to see why the Government is acting this way. Just look at Thursday's local election results, which saw sectarian Muslim candidate taking council seats in Labour heartlands. Or the last general election, where four 'Gaza independents' were elected and senior figures such as Wes Streeting and Jess Phillips almost lost their seats.
The Labour Party has until recently been happy to have this bloc inside the tent, and is frightened of the electoral consequences of losing it. If keeping such voters happy means suppressing an inquiry into the rape gangs – or selecting MPs more interested in a new airport in Mirpur than rubbish piling up on the streets in their own constituencies – then so be it.
Perhaps there is also an element of straightforward denial, too. If you built your entire politics on the idea that Britain is an integration success story and only bad people would attack our 'diverse communities', as have politicians like Powell, you too would be very wary of collecting the evidence.
She herself is probably doomed, if for no other reason that this row means the nation is once again talking about Rotherham. But the Government's actions – or inactions – speak louder than words, and it's clear that Powell has only said what other ministers are content merely to think.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Investors can't trust Labour, warns UK bond giant
Investors can no longer trust Labour after its multiple about-turns, bond giant Legal & General (L&G) has warned. Sonja Laud, the chief investment officer at L&G, said the decision to abandon key benefit reforms and reverse course on winter fuel payments had destroyed faith in the Government's economic plans. L&G is one of Britain's biggest investors, managing £1.1 trillion of assets. It is one of the biggest buyers of UK government debt. Ms Laud said: '[Markets] can't trust that what's been put forward will be put in place. You will see the adverse reaction. It was quite a big one yesterday.' It follows a dramatic day in which Rachel Reeves's tears in the House of Commons triggered a fall in the pound and a jump in borrowing costs. Investors were concerned that the Chancellor could be on the brink of leaving Downing Street, sparking fears that her fiscal rules could be abandoned. However, borrowing costs had been rising even before the Chancellor wept after Sir Keir Starmer gutted his welfare reforms on Tuesday night to avoid an embarrassing defeat on the legislation. The about-turn has blown a £5bn hole in Ms Reeves's budget. Ms Laud said: 'The changes we have seen ever since the first announcements from the Labour Party - and the intended changes they wanted to put forward - have subsequently been either watered down or changed. 'That's what the bond market does not like. The reaction in the gilt market yesterday [shows] that there clearly is an unwillingness to accept that lack of clarity.' She added that traders were still nervous after Liz Truss's mini-Budget. She said: 'There's heightened sensitivity in the UK because of what happened in 2022, where you had unfunded fiscal promises.' Ms Laud's comments come as Sir Keir and Ms Reeves scramble to repair the damage done this week. The Chancellor made a surprise appearance alongside the Prime Minister at an event on Thursday, at which she insisted she remained committed to her fiscal rules. The Prime Minister also said Ms Reeves would remain Chancellor 'for many years to come'. Borrowing costs dipped in response but remain higher than where they were just days ago. David Roberts, at Nedgroup Investments, said the bond market turmoil was a 'flashback to the days of Liz Truss'. 'Having been elected on a mandate to sort out public finances, to rein in benefit spending, it appears many in the [Labour] party have decided to return to their traditional tax and spend ideology,' he said. 'Failure to push through welfare reform whilst adhering to fiscal rules seems to leave the Government with little option other than to raise taxes.' Morgan Stanley warned that the struggling Chancellor could be as much as £30bn in the red against her fiscal rules ahead of the autumn Budget. With limited room to borrow or cut spending, 'tax hikes look most likely,' the bank said. Sir Keir's failure to grasp the nettle of welfare reform means Britain will spend £1.5bn a week on health and disability benefits for working-age adults by the end of the decade. The bill is on course to balloon to £75.7bn by 2029-30, up by one quarter from £60.4bn this year. It puts the cost of this portion of the welfare state on a par with the defence budget. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Powell: Trump's tariffs held up rate cuts
Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said Tuesday that the central bank would likely have already cut interest rates this year if not for the economic shock generated by President Trump's tariffs. When asked Tuesday if Trump's tariffs held up the Fed's plan to cut interest rates, Powell affirmed. 'I think that's right,' he said at a central banking conference in Portugal. 'We went on hold when we saw the size of the tariffs. … All inflation forecasts for the United States went up materially as a consequence of the tariffs.' The confirmation is likely to draw more backlash from Trump, who has reset U.S. trade relations with wide-ranging tariffs and bashed Powell for pausing cuts, which started last year. In April, Trump announced tariffs against dozens of countries using a novel calculation based on trade deficits. He imposed a general tariff of 10 percent and ended up raising tariffs on China to 145 percent. Powell said Tuesday he's expecting to see higher inflation over the summer and that the Fed expects to lower rates later this year. Currently, the Fed is forecasting two quarter-point rate cuts for 2025. Powell also discussed handing the economy over to his 'successor,' though he did not formally comment on whether he was leaving the Fed board altogether when his term expires next May. 'I have a little more than 10 months left on my terms as chair,' he said. 'I want to hand over to my successor an economy in good shape.' Powell could choose to serve on the Fed board through 2028 — which would be an unusual step — but has not commented on whether he would do so. Trump shared a handwritten note to Powell on Monday urging him to lower interest rates, his latest attempt to push the central bank to do so. Trump posted on Truth Social complaining Powell and the rest of the Fed board of governors 'should be ashamed of themselves' for declining to lower interest rates. Other parts of the world have seen inflation fall to a 2-percent annual increase while inflation in the U.S. is higher. In the consumer price index (CPI), it's at 2.4 percent. In the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) index, it's at 2.3 percent. Both indices have increased in their most recent readings. European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde acknowledged her success on Tuesday. 'We are at 2 percent,' she said. 'I'm not saying mission accomplished – but target reached.' The Fed has held off on rate cuts in order to see where exactly the cost of tariffs is going to factor in various value chains. It could be paid by the manufacturer, exporter, importer, or retailer, or it could be paid by the end consumer if companies simply raise their prices. Tariffs could also kill wholesale demand for various products if companies decide certain products are not worth the additional cost of the tariff. This could have a deflationary rather than inflationary effect, a possibility discussed Tuesday by Rhee Chang-Yong, governor of the Bank of Korea. 'We believe tariffs tend to be deflationary rather than inflationary,' he said, citing falling Chinese export prices and high rates of Korean imports. Similarly, the U.S. has seen prices for apparel – a heavily imported good – fall this year as import prices in general have held stable. Pricing dynamics in the economy are complex and vary from sector to sector. Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey pinned inflation on 'administered prices,' which is a pricing strategy based on long-term company costs, rather than the profit-maximizing market forces of supply and demand. Inflation in the U.K. is currently at a 4-percent annual increase. 'The reason it's gone up is really entirely due to so-called administered prices,' he said. Kazuo Ueda, governor of the Bank of Japan, separated tariff-inflation into the three distinct categories of underlying cost-push inflation, expected or psychological inflation, and inflation from a domestic supply shock seen especially in food prices. 'This component accounts for about 50 percent of the headline inflation we've got at the moment,' he said. Asked about the inflation-adjusted neutral rate of interest, Powell said Tuesday he thought it was 'probably modestly restrictive at this level, and by some formulations, we're more restrictive than that.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump says Powell costs US $900B a year in interest by not cutting rates. Is he right?
In his stinging monthslong campaign to badger Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell into lowering interest rates, President Donald Trump has relied on a variety of arguments. He's pointed to the European Central Bank's two percentage points of rate cuts and a report showing weakening private-sector job growth. Most recently, he has cited a claim that Fed's refusal to slash its key rate is costing the federal government hundreds of billions of dollars a year in interest payments on its debt. Is Trump right? In the short term, analyst say, lower rates likely would save the government money. But that comes with some big caveats. This week, on his Truth Social site, Trump shared a handwritten note he wrote to Powell. 'You are, as usual, 'Too Late,' he wrote. 'You have cost the USA a fortune and continue to do so. You should lower the interest rate by a lot! Hundreds of billions of dollars being lost! No inflation.' Attaching a list of central bank interest rates, Trump drew two arrows pointing to a rate between Japan's 0.5% and the 1.75% shared by Denmark, Seychelles and Thailand. That suggests Trump thinks the Fed should chop its key short term interest rate by a whopping 3 percentage points or so, from a range of 4.25% to 4.5% to about 1.25%. Last week, calling Powell a 'numbskull,' a 'dumb guy,' and a 'Trump Hater,' the president said a 3 point rate cut would save the government $900 billion a year in interest payments. Broadly speaking, 'If the Fed were to lower rates… it would indeed likely lower the cost of Treasury debt,' said John Canavan, lead financial market analyst at Oxford Economics. 'Lower rates are probably going to save the government money,' added Wells Fargo senior economist Mike Pugliese. However, Trump appears to be overstating the savings, said Gbenga Ajilore, chief economist of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. The Fed is an independent agency and its job is not to reduce interest rates to make borrowing cheaper for the federal government, Canavan and Pugliese said. Under its two congressional mandates, the central bank reduces rates to lower borrowing costs for Americans and bolster a sluggish economy. It hikes rates or keeps them high longer to head off inflation. The Fed slashed its key rate by a percentage point late last year after a pandemic-related inflation spike eased but has paused since. In testimony before Congress in late June, Powell agreed the Fed's preferred inflation measure, now at 2.3%, has dropped closer to its 2% goal. But he said Trump's tariffs are expected to spark a 'meaningful increase in inflation' in coming months and officials want to wait and see how that plays out before reducing rates again. Putting aside the Fed's mandates, it's reasonable to wonder if a Fed rate decrease would save the government lots of money at a time the national debt tops $36 trillion. Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill is projected to add $3.3 trillion to the red ink, according to the Congressional Budget Office. It's not clear how Trump came up with the $900 billion and a White House spokesperson did not return an email seeking an explanation. But Trump told Fox News on June 29 that the government must refinance $9 trillion in debt coming due this year. The Treasury Department's total annual interest payments on all its debt are projected to grow to about $1 trillion in fiscal 2026, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Just taking the $9 trillion that must be refinanced, interest rates that have risen sharply since the U.S. first issued the debt could cost the government as much as an additional $300 billion a year, Axel Funhoff, a corporate finance professor at Antwerp Management School in Belgium, wrote in a LinkedIn article earlier this year. That suggests the U.S. Treasury could save more than $100 billion a year if the Fed cut its key rate by 3 percentage points. But that would be a massive cut, unprecedented during a time the economy is generally stable and far larger than the percentage point drop Fed officials estimate they'll approve through gradual quarter-point decreases by 2027. Also, large rate cuts could have unintended consequences for U.S. debt costs. The Fed's benchmark interest rate is a short-term rate and so it directly affects short-term assets such as Treasury bills with terms up to a year, Canavan said. Thus, a quarter-point Fed rate cut, he said, likely would have a similar affect on such Treasury bills. But only about 20% of the Treasury's outstanding debt is in such short-term securities, though almost all new debt is short term because long-term rates are high, Canavan said. More than half the debt is in 2- to 10-year Treasury bonds, he said, and the rest is in longer term securities of up to 30 years, floating rate bonds and other assets. Those securities are affected by Fed rate moves because they influence investor expectations about future Fed actions, Canavan said. But only partly. Because investors hold those assets for long periods of time, they're mostly affected by factors such as the economic outlook, inflation expectations, the size of the federal deficit and investors' confidence in Treasury bonds as a safe and reliable investment, Canavan said. 'If the market decides the Fed is cutting too much' to satisfy Trump or lower borrowing costs for the U.S. Treasury, investors likely would worry about a future inflation spike, causing them to demand higher rates to lend the government money, Canavan said. Otherwise, he said, inflation could erode the value of their bonds. In that case, 'You may see long term rates rise' even though the Fed is reducing its short term rate, he said. In other words, by causing investors to question the Fed's independence, Trump's calls for rate cuts could result in the outcome he least desires, assuming the Fed acquiesced to his pleas. "Monetary policy only works if the Fed has credibility," Ajiilore said. Canavan said it's difficult to say if government savings from a drop in short-term rates – which must be refinanced more frequently – would more than offset any losses from a rise in long-term rates. Pugliese said the U.S. Treasury likely still would come out ahead in the near term. But 'over the long term it would probably cost money,' he said. By contrast, if the Fed reduces rates twice later this year and once in 2026 as officials expect, investors would be more confident that officials are making the moves because inflation is easing and not because of political pressure. The result likely would be lower short-term and long-term rates, and lower interest payments for the government. This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Trump claims Fed rate cuts would save $900B a year: Reality check
