Latest news with #LabourParty
The Sun
34 minutes ago
- Business
- The Sun
Keir Starmer ‘put party before country' by caving in to benefit cut rebels, blasts Labour peer
SIR KEIR Starmer has put 'party before country' by caving to rebels and softening his benefit cuts, a Labour peer has warned. The PM was slammed for opting to appease the revolt rather than sticking with flagship reforms. Former benefits minister Lord Hutton said: 'The country cannot afford to sit back and see these welfare levels rising in the way they are and although it's uncomfortable for a lot of Labour MPs we can't go on ducking.' He added: 'I think the people that we mustn't lose sight of in all of this debate are the taxpayers who fund the welfare system.' 'It's rising at a level which I think is really unsustainable over the medium term, and the job of government is to address that, not to try and pretend it's not there." He says that the PM will have 'no choice' but to come back to welfare spending and try and reduce it. The climbdown on benefits and the winter fuel u-turn will force Chancellor Rachel Reeves to find £4.5billion after 126 Labour MPs threatened to derail plans. Downing Street insisted there would be no 'permanent' increase in borrowing but declined to rue out tax rises at the Autumn Budget to pay for it. Sir Keir said: 'For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it.' But hardline Labour rebel Nadia Whittome said the concessions were 'nowhere near good enough'.
The Independent
42 minutes ago
- Business
- The Independent
What can Rachel Reeves do to pay for Starmer's welfare U-turn?
Taken together, the cost to the public finances of recent reversals on welfare payments is estimated to be around £4.5bn. Restoration of the pensioners ' winter fuel payment for most recipients will cost some £1.2bn, while keeping the present arrangements on personal independence payment and the health element of universal credit will mean the chancellor loses some £2.1bn and £1.1bn, respectively. While these aren't catastrophic changes in a total public spending universe of about £1.3 trillion, Rachel Reeves allowed herself very little fiscal headroom. So she'll be looking to make up for the cost of the recent U-turns. Given that she's only just delivered a spending review that set out plans for the next three years, including tighter budgets for many government departments, she is reportedly more willing to consider tax hikes. The uncertain outlook for economic growth will make her even more cautious. Despite constraints, she has some options… What won't Rachel Reeves do? All the signs are that she won't make any further changes that could be interpreted as a direct contravention of the 2024 general election manifesto promise: 'We will ensure taxes on working people are kept as low as possible. Labour will not increase taxes on working people, which is why we will not increase national insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of income tax, or VAT.' The 2 per cent hike in employers' national insurance at the last Budget hit smaller businesses quite hard, and will affect wage rises, so it was very close to the letter of that pledge. She's not going to go there again. But bear in mind that the freeze on tax thresholds will remain in place until 2028 – a hidden rise in income tax for many. Is anything else ruled out? Lots: there's a whole herd of sacred cattle that she can't touch, politically. These include the rate of corporation tax, about which the manifesto says: ' Labour will cap corporation tax at the current level of 25 per cent, the lowest in the G7, for the entire parliament'. Slapping VAT on zero-rated items is effectively ruled out, as are increases in most other business taxes. There's zero chance of any further capital gains tax being applied to homeowners, which would make eminent economic sense but would be electoral suicide. Reeves may also have run out of scope for squeezing rich non-doms – for fear of ending up with lower tax revenues due to flight and increased avoidance. Council tax procedures are being tweaked, but there is little chance of any thorough reform of the eccentric system of local government finance; memories of the imposition of the poll tax remain raw, almost four decades on. The big picture here is that the UK tax base is artificially narrow, for historical and political reasons. For example, personal taxation in the UK is still low by international standards, even when the overall tax burden is near a post-Second World War high, but UK business rates are correspondingly high and uncompetitive. Wealth is taxed marginally and haphazardly. This is bad for long-term growth, and every year means taxes are loaded too high onto a too-narrow base. What is an easy hit? Capital gains tax, as usual, but again Reeves will need to be careful not to go too far and risk discouraging savings and encouraging avoidance. The same goes for changing the rules on personal pensions: higher-rate tax relief on contributions and reducing the tax-free allowance for a cash withdrawal from a pension pot. Given the need for orderly retirement planning, radical changes would be undesirable and unpopular. But there could be adjustments. Will petrol go up? It certainly should. Unbelievably, fuel duty has been frozen since 2011, at 57.95p per litre, with an additional 5p per litre 'temporary' cut in 2022 to ease the cost of living crisis. Technically, this is due to be ended next year, with the duty now scheduled to rise. For Reeves to raise more than planned she'd have to up it by, say, 10p per litre. It would raise enough to pay for the U-turns, but would attract the scorn of the motorist and 'white van man'. The wider problem here is that the switch to electric vehicles is already depressing fuel duties. Sin taxes? Alcohol and tobacco are mostly maxed out, but there's still some scope with online gambling and duties on sugary and fatty foods. The sugary drinks levy worked very well on health grounds alone, but any 'tax on food' has always been anathema to the British public (albeit VAT is levied on confectionery). Reeves will also be mindful of the great 'pasty tax' fiasco of 2012 when George Osborne tried to make some rational changes to the VAT regime, including on 'ambient' takeaway food. His 'omnishambles' Budget soon collapsed, and Greggs customers have steadily got flabbier in the succeeding years. Rachel will be steering clear. What does the Labour left want? A wealth tax: a 2 per cent levy for those with assets in excess of £10m. No chance. What about a tax on interest the Bank of England pays the banks on deposits? That does crop up as a suggestion. It's very abstruse stuff, but this basically boils down to another tax on the commercial banks. It isn't paid by 'rich bankers' as such (though it might dent some bonuses) but by the banks themselves. Other things being equal, it would mean lower returns for savers, less availability of business finance and mortgages, and a less resilient banking system. The Bank of England says it could make managing monetary policy more difficult. But it could reduce the cost of borrowing to the Treasury by maybe £10bn a year. The chancellor may find the temptation irresistible.
The Sun
an hour ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Starmer is a clueless, cowardly windsock whose deceit has taken him from loveless landslide to landfill
FOR what it is worth, I am neither surprised nor disappointed by Sir Keir Starmer's calamitous first year as Prime Minister. Sir Shifty was always going to be a dud in Downing Street just as he was in opposition. What has really shocked me — along with millions of Sun readers — is his swift and spiteful attack on the social fabric which binds our nation and our trust in democracy. On July 4 last year, Britain carelessly elected an activist regime, whose sole but unstated objective is to unravel everything that makes us British. In the blink of an eye we have been divided by a narrow socialist cult against an overwhelming majority of decent, fair-minded law-abiding citizens. We are being routinely lied to, ordered to believe the unbelievable and threatened with jail if we refuse. For all his fine words to Nato and to Parliament, Starmer and his socialist rabble are intent on attacking the foundations of our democracy — the rule of law and the defence of the nation. Left-wing zealots Thin-skinned Starmer is not just clueless as a political leader. He is a coward who runs like a yellow streak from every tough decision that crosses his desk. Indeed, our windsock PM has just surrendere d even the pretence of leadership. This week, he became the publicly humiliated hostage of the Corbynite left he once boasted of defeating. Close to collapse, Downing Street has abjectly surrendered over a piffling £5billion cut in the bloated welfare bill. This places Starmer at the mercy of Jeremy's loony left. Two-Tier Keir might continue to strut the world stage as an international statesman. But this emperor has no clothes. If he cannot cut a few quid off the handouts to nine million people on employment-related benefits, how can he persuade left-wing zealots to cough up billions for defence? Or to cut illegal immigration and 'smash the gangs'? The people smugglers backed by the Kremlin's Vladimir Putin — as The Sun revealed this week — will keep sending us tens of thousands of bearded young men of fighting age. Corbynites do not believe in borders. Nor do they believe in crime and punishment — unless there is a Tory in the dock. Sir Shifty stubbornly defied calls for a proper inquiry into the rape of thousands of white teenage girls by mainly Pakistani gangs in mainly Labour-controlled authorities. Cabinet ministers were licensed to smear protesters as 'far right dog-whistlers'. A backlash was inevitable. Thousands of angry voters fled from Labour. Along with Tory defectors, they swelled the ranks of Reform UK and turned insurgent Nigel Farage into the man most likely to be our next PM. Now, in a screeching U-turn, there will be a national grooming gang inquiry after all. So, landslide to landfill in a single year. Farage is entitled to celebrate. He has reaped the whirlwind from the collapse of two-party politics. Still, Reform has only five MPs and virtually nobody in the House of Lords. Nor is it any consolation that Labour's Pyrrhic victory last July was entirely due to 14 years of dismal Tory failure. David Cameron, George Osborne, Theresa May, Liz Truss and — not least — Boris Johnson have much to answer for. 4 Along with Rishi Sunak, Boris hammered the final nails into the Tory coffin with Covid lockdowns and one million new migrants in a single year. The result was a great Fourth of July belch of anti-Tory revulsion, which handed Labour class warriors their 'loveless landslide' and absolute power for five years. We know now that it was a victory based on lies. Deceit runs through Starmer's brand of politics like 'Brighton' through a stick of rock. Deceit is more than telling blatant porkies, such as promising not to raise tax or National Insurance. It means concealing the truth, like Labour's plan to axe the Winter Fuel Allowance. It involves gaslighting — coercing people to believe in fairytales, such as green energy, bending the knee to Black Lives Matter or claiming women can have a penis. And there are petty deceits, such as the gifts to our multi-millionaire PM of free suits and specs, and designer frocks for Lady Starmer, from an ambitious party donor. Sir Shifty stubbornly defied calls for a proper inquiry into the rape of thousands of white teenage girls by mainly Pakistani gangs in mainly Labour-controlled authorities. Starmer's Labour was deep in such tacky mire before last year's election, and it has continued in that style since. We were told porkies about £20billion 'black holes' in Britain's genuinely improving economy. We were promised the 'adults were back in charge', only to see Chancellor Rachel Reeves send borrowing into orbit while trashing our reputation as a magnet for foreign investment. We were told lies about gifting the strategically vital Chagos islands to China's military ally, Mauritius, with the true cost to the taxpayer being in excess of £30BILLION over 99 years. Starmer promised Labour would repair the sacred NHS, only for Health Secretary Wes Streeting to admit it is getting worse. But if there is one single issue that sums up the cant, hypocrisy and contempt for voters by both major parties, it is the flood of uncontrolled mass immigration. 4 4 Labour's traditional working class supporters, many in Red Wall seats, were shamed and silenced after Gordon Brown opened the floodgates to cheap imported labour. Those daring to protest are slandered as 'racist' or 'Islamophobic'. Yet the UK population has boomed by millions since, with a dire impact on the wages and living standards of voters Labour took for granted. Rightly or wrongly — rightly in my view — voters believe this inevitable clash of cultures has led to dangerous divisions in cities and major towns. It remains shocking that police failed to act against Pakistani grooming gangs for fear of stoking 'community tensions'. Growing anger Last year's Southport riots, stridently denounced by Starmer, were blamed on police silence over the racial background of the man who fatally stabbed three schoolgirls at a Taylor Swift dance class. There is growing anger over Labour's plans to create new blasphemy laws, meaning criticism of Islam would be a criminal offence, while police turn a blind eye to intimidation by pro-Palestinian protesters. Keir Starmer is a lifelong pro-Palestinian. His party and his government are beholden to Muslims who vote Labour. Labour lives in fear of moves by Muslim hardliners to set up their own party in Parliament with enough MPs to dictate coalition terms. The question now is whether Starmer can cling on for four more years as Prime Minister. Can his Labour government survive in power? More to the point, how do we as a country escape from the vicious cocktail of tension, deceit and distrust created not just by Sir Shifty's Labour, but by every government since Tony Blair took office in 1997? People want to feel change so speed up delivery. There is still time to turn it around By David Blunkett, Former Home Secretary IF I wrote here that everything had gone well in the last year in politics, you would stop reading. So this is an honest appraisal of how I think the Government, which I support, has fared since winning the election on July 4. The first big decision, which was intended to secure the confidence of the international bond markets, created a major political hit. Namely, the now-reversed decision on Winter Fuel Allowance, affecting up to 10million people in retirement. The intention was to offer economic rectitude and stability, but the consequence was an immediate collapse in popularity. This was matched by the 'miserabilist' messages that they were picking up the pieces from years of chaos. It was true that there were major gaps in public finances, which somehow had to be filled if services weren't to fall apart. But the electorate had already got that message. That's why, across the whole of the country, the Conservatives lost so badly. What people wanted was hope, and what they got was downbeat at best, doom and gloom at worst. Steadying the ship and balancing the books is worthy, but in a world of political turmoil, of populists and chancers, the electorate were looking for precisely what Keir Starmer had promised — 'change'. The truth is, there has been genuine action to put things right. Enormous cash for the NHS; a commitment to a dramatic housebuilding target; and investment in transport, clean energy and education to bring success in the long term. The problem is that they are 'long term' at a moment when so many people are looking for dramatic improvement in the here and now. That is why the opinion polls are so devastating for the two traditional mainstream political parties. As with American President Donald Trump, the audacious, bizarre, sometimes off-the-wall and completely incredible catch people's attention. The 'same old' of tinkering and ticking along feels like business as usual. But it is 'business as usual' that many people just do not want. So, if the first 12 months have been a learning curve, what are the lessons for the years ahead? Quite simply, build on what you've done best. 'The best' includes Britain's standing on the world stage. Dealing with world security and defence; alliances to tackle conflict across the world; reaching trade deals and even managing to square the circle of relationships with the US President. All of this in the last six months has been both impressive and vitally necessary. More of this decisiveness, and grasping of nettles here at home, would make all the difference. For instance, stop using phrases like 'working at pace' and actually get on with the job. One of the features of the last year, and long before that, is a kind of inertia. I'm sure that civil servants genuinely believe they're working hard. I'm sure that ministers believe they have joined up policies and that, when they pull a lever, something is happening on the ground. For millions of voters, however, nothing has changed. That is why action in the pipeline now needs to be accelerated. That is why relentless focus on delivery at local level is so vital, and tangible change in the lives of men and women who can only watch on as global conflict and turmoil unfold. However — and it has to be said — not everything is down to government. The lousy service you receive (public or private), gross incompetence and indifference to the wellbeing of others is as likely to be the fault of someone living down your street as it is elected politicians. This government has three years to demonstrate that they can really make a difference. Three years in which to stop Reform UK leader Nigel Farage deluding the nation into believing there are simple and easy answers to the greatest questions of our time. Failure to live up to those expectations or get it wrong, the consequences will be felt for generations to come. Self-evidently, I didn't get everything right in my time in government. So, learning from mistakes and shifting up a gear is the way forward for Keir Starmer and his ministerial team. There is still time to turn this around.
Times
2 hours ago
- Politics
- Times
Meet Brian Leishman, the leftwinger holding Keir Starmer's feet to the fire
Sir Keir Starmer has been prime minister for less than a year but his government's retreat from its own proposed welfare reforms is the kind of political humiliation rarely visited upon any government so early in its tenure, let alone upon one that won a 174-seat majority at last July's general election. Across Britain, however, newly elected Labour MPs made it clear to the prime minister and Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, that they were not, in their view, sent to Westminster to preside over cuts to welfare spending. The government's decision to limit changes to disability benefits to new claimants — protecting those who currently claim up to £110 a week to assist them with the costs of their physical or mental difficulties — may satisfy some parliamentary rebels but many others remain implacably opposed to any changes in welfare eligibility. 'The concessions have turned an absolute horrific policy into an awful policy,' said Brian Leishman, the left-wing firebrand elected as the Labour MP for Alloa & Grangemouth last year. 'The government has got to pull it, and get around the table with charities and others and devise a proper welfare system designed for people who need it.' 'There is no way I will be voting for the sort of two-tier welfare system this will create', he said. Leishman overturned an SNP majority of more than 12,000 votes as Labour swept to victory north of the border, taking 36 seats from the SNP. Although Labour had been confident the party could take a swathe of central belt seats from the nationalists, Alloa & Grangemouth was considered the kind of seat that could fall to Starmer's party only in exceptional circumstances. As it transpired, however, the election was precisely that kind of occasion and Leishman took the seat with a swing of 29.3 per cent. His victory, party insiders concede, was 'not expected'. Since entering the Commons Leishamn has emerged as the highest-profile figure within a reanimated and reinvigorated Scottish left. 'Brian has been a brilliant MP. He has fought tirelessly for his constituents, stood up for real Labour values and be unafraid to oppose the worst aspects of the Starmer regime. He is exactly the type of campaigning MP people want to see,' Neil Findlay, the former Labour MSP, said. Leishman, who is the only new Labour MP from Scotland to have joined the left-wing Scottish Campaign for Socialism group, also enjoyed the support of Richard Leonard, the former leader of the Scottish Labour Party. Campaigning for Leishman last year Leonard pointedly asked voters to 'ensure that the next Labour government has a Scottish socialist among its ranks, fighting for the many not the few'. The rebuke to Starmer was overt rather than merely implied. While most newly elected MPs struggle to make a name for themselves, the combination of Leishman's left-wing credentials and the fate of the Grangemouth oil refinery in his constituency gave him the kind of platform few of his Scottish colleagues — most of whom continue to labour in some measure of obscurity — enjoyed. 'There could have been many more Labour MPs like Brian in parliament had they not been blocked from being selected by the people, or more accurately person, who controls Labour selections in Scotland,' Findlay said. MPs who win surprising victories often surprise party managers. 'The only thing we knew about him was he was a golfer,' said one Westminster colleague referring to Leishman's previous career as a golf professional. 'Was it a surprise that he turned out to be a firebrand leftie? Yes it was. He's not disliked, and has a tendency to pick up fashionable causes, even some he appears to have little background in.' Another Scottish Labour MP notes that Leishman's higher-than-typical profile has irked many of his colleagues. 'He was the first Scottish Labour MP outside of the ministers to get a profile, and not in a good way so he's not massively popular in the Scottish Labour group.' Leishman, who says his ideal dinner party guests would be Tony Benn and Jack Nicklaus, is unabashed. 'I didn't join the Labour Party to impoverish people.' Although a dozen Scottish Labour backbenchers signalled their opposition to the planned welfare reform that would have trimmed £5 billion from a disability bill that is expected to be more than £60 billion a year by the end of the decade, few have been as public or forthright in their criticisms as Leishman. That has allowed him to become a champion of the Labour left and a figure of considerable suspicion for the party's right wing and those still loyal to the prime minister. The impact of the welfare rebellion on next year's Scottish parliament elections is not yet easily estimated. Anas Sarwar, Labour Scottish leader, insists that 'everyone' favours some of the welfare reform, pointing to the fact that disability claims are higher in Scotland than England. Yet the SNP senses the opportunity to embarrass Labour on this issue, insisting there will be no change to looser, more generous, eligibility criteria for disability payments in Scotland. This remains the case despite the fact that Scottish Fiscal Commission indicated this week that ministers face a 'really challenging period', with spending on social security forecast to grow from just over £6.1 billion in 2024-25 to more than £9.4 billion by 2030-31. Increased spending on welfare and the NHS inevitably means less money will be available for other causes and priorities. For Leishman and his newly emboldened backbench allies, however, rebellion is a taste that once acquired may easily become a habit. Starmer's concessions to his backbenchers are, for many, both too little too late and a taste of controversies to come.
Times
2 hours ago
- Business
- Times
Kebab king's SME outfit ‘lobbies for big tobacco'
A t a Middle Eastern restaurant nestled under railway arches not far from Westminster on Monday, senior Labour figures gathered for an evening fundraiser. As the drinks flowed, Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, Lord Mandelson, the Labour peer and British ambassador to the United States, and Darren Jones, a Treasury minister, gave speeches. The reception was supported by SME4Labour, a relatively obscure business group founded by Ibrahim Dogus, a Kurdish restaurateur dubbed the 'Kebab king' who has cultivated an extraordinary hotline granting businesses access to Labour's top table. Dogus, 44, best known as the founder of the British Kebab Awards — dubbed the Oscars for the doner — also runs SME4Labour, which has convinced the Labour Party's great and good to turn up to its events, which business figures can pay thousands of pounds to attend.
