Latest news with #LizTruss
BBC News
14 hours ago
- Business
- BBC News
Benefits U-turn raises questions about Labour's long-term plan
About a quarter of the working age population - those aged 16 to 64 - do not currently have a job. Caring responsibilities and ill health are the most common reasons given by those who would like a four-year mandate and a towering majority, Labour might have been expected to have invested in a long-term plan to help those who are sick get back into the workforce, at least part-time. It may have cost up front, but in the future it could have delivered big its determination to avoid a repeat of the Liz Truss mini-budget led them to target big savings quickly - but it ended up causing perhaps even more trouble, with the government performing a spectacular U-turn to avoid a mass Labour raises significant questions, not just about how this year-old government manages its affairs day to day, but if its overall strategy to renew the country is on track. Long-term reform vs short-term savings The government was adamant that its "welfare reform" changes - announced in March's Green Paper - were designed to get people back to bulk of planned savings came from tightening the eligibility for Personal Independence Payments (Pip), which are paid to support people who face extra costs due to disability, regardless of whether or not they are in work. Independent experts questioned whether more of the savings should have been redeployed to help people with ill health ease back in to the workforce, for example part time. That could mean support such as potential employer subsidies - especially to help get younger people into work and pay taxes, rather than claim benefits long term. It could also help fill jobs - a win win for rebels argued that the upfront cuts were aimed at filling a Budget hole against the Chancellor's self imposed borrowing rules. Their central criticism was that this was an emergency cost-cutting is true that the Chancellor's Budget numbers were blown off course by higher borrowing costs, such as those emanating from US President Donald Trump's shock tariffs, so she bridged the borrowing gap with these cuts. The welfare reform plan to save £5bn a year by 2029-30 helped Chancellor Rachel Reeves meet her "non negotiable" borrowing rules. Indeed when the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which monitors the spending plans, said they would not in fact raise enough money, Reeves announced more welfare cuts on the day of the Spring main point was to raise money to help close the gap in the Budget tell me that the welfare reform plan was in fact brought forward for this purpose. But this was still not a full programme of welfare reform designed to deal with a structural issue of rising health-related claims. 'Top slicing never works' The former Conservative Welfare Secretary Iain Duncan Smith resigned as work and pensions secretary almost ten years ago, saying a similar plan to cut disability benefits was "indefensible".He says the cuts should have formed part of "a wider process" of finding the best way to focus resources on those most in need."Top slicing never works," he says of plans to extract savings from the welfare budget without its heart the problem is perceived to be that the current welfare structure has become overly binary, failing to accommodate a growing demographic who should be able to do at least a bit of work. This rigidity - what ministers refer to as a "hard boundary" - inadvertently pushes individuals towards declaring complete unfitness for work, and can lead to total dependence on welfare, particularly universal credit health (UC Health), rather than facilitating a gradual transition back into some leading experts this is, in fact, the biggest cause of the increase in health-related welfare claims. The pandemic may have accelerated the trend, but it started a decade proportion of working age people claiming incapacity benefit had fallen well below 5% in 2015, now it's 7%.The pandemic period exacerbated the rise as ill health rose and many claims were agreed without face-to-face meetings. These claims were also increasingly related to mental ill health. One former minister, who did not wanted to be named, said the system had effectively broken down."The real trouble is people are learning to game the Pip questionnaire with help from internet sites," he says. "It's pretty straightforward to answer the questions in a way that gets the points."As he puts it, the UK is "at the extreme of paying people for being disabled" with people getting money rather than equipment such as wheelchairs as occurs in other most kinds of mental ill health, in kind support, such as therapies, would make more sense than cash transfers, he some disability campaigners have said that being offered vouchers instead of cash payments and thereby removing people's automony over spending, is "an insult" and "dangerous". These pressures can be seen in the nature of the compromise planned cuts to Pip payments will now only apply to new claimants from November next year, sparing 370,000 current claimants out of the 800,000 expected to be affected by the Meg Hillier, Labour MP and chair of the Commons Treasury committee, along with other rebels, have also pointed out that the application of the new four-point threshold for Pip payments will be designed together with disability is a fair assumption that this so called "co-production" may enable more future claimants to retain this universal credit, the government had planned to freeze the higher rate for existing health-related claimants but the payments will now rise in line with inflation. And for future claimants of universal credit, the most severe cases will be spared from a planned halving of the payments, worth an average of £3,000 per these calculations don't take into account the effects of £1bn the government has pulled forward to spend to help those with disabilities and long-term health conditions find work as swiftly as possible. This originally wasn't due to come in until 2029. This change does help Labour's argument that the changes are about reform rather than cost cutting. But this is still not fully fledged radical reform on the scale that is needed to tackle a social, fiscal and economic crisis. The OBR has not yet done the Keep Britain Working review, led by former John Lewis boss Sir Charlie Mayfield, which was commissioned by the government to look into the role of employers in health and disability, has not yet been the Netherlands, where a similar challenge was tackled two decades ago, their system makes employers responsible for the costs of helping people back into work for the first two businesses are concerned about the costs of tax, wages and employment rights policies. And there is already a fundamental question about whether the jobs are out there to support sick workers back into the workforce. Tax rises or other spending cuts The Institute for Fiscal Studies and Resolution Foundation think tanks have estimated the government's U-turn could cost £3bn, meaning Chancellor Rachel Reeves will either have to increase taxes in the autumn budget or cut spending elsewhere if she is to meet her self-imposed spending the income tax threshold freeze again, seems a plausible plan There are still a few months to go, so the Treasury might hope that growth is sustained and that borrowing costs settle, helping with the OBR numbers. It will not be lost on anyone that the precise cause of all this, however, was a hasty effort to try to bridge this same Budget rule maths gap that emerged in questions arise about just how stability and credibility-enhancing it really is to tweak fiscal plans every six months to hit Budget targets that change due to market conditions, with changes that cannot be ultimately idea floated by the International Monetary Fund that these Budget adjustments are only really needed once a year must seem quite attractive today. Is Britain getting sicker? And then there are bigger questions left Britain really fundamentally sicker than it was a decade ago, and if it is, does society want to continue current levels of support? If the best medicine really is work, as some suggest, then can employers cope, and will there be enough jobs?Or was it the system itself - previous welfare cuts - that caused the ramp up in claims in recent years, requiring a more thought-through type of reform? Should support for disability designed to help with the specific costs of physical challenges be required at similar levels by those with depression or anxiety?Dare this government make further changes to welfare? And, in pursuing narrow Budget credibility, has it lost more political credibility without actually being able to pass its plans into law?The government is not just boxed in. It seems to have created one of those magician's tricks where they handcuff themselves behind their backs in a locked box - only they lack the escape skills of a Houdini or will be relief that the markets are calm for now, with sterling and stock markets at multi-year highs. But an effort to close a Budget gap, has ended up with perhaps even more fundamental questions about how and if the government can get things done. BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Telegraph
19 hours ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Badenoch channels Thatcher (and Truss) atop military machine
It was a tradition started by Margaret Thatcher and subsequently imitated by Liz Truss. Now Kemi Badenoch has become the latest female Conservative leader to pose atop a British Army vehicle. Mrs Badenoch sat in the turret of the Mastiff armoured patrol car as she visited a British Army base in her constituency. The Tory leader smiled as she was driven around Carver Barracks near Debden, Essex. Her choice of vehicle came with less firepower than Ms Truss and Thatcher. In 1986, the then-prime minister rode atop a Challenger tank at a Nato training ground near Fallingbostel, West Germany. Wearing a mac, scarf and goggles, Thatcher used a laser-guided weapons system to fire a 6lb practice shell from the tank. She later declared she 'loved it'. The next day's edition of The Daily Telegraph described her outfit as a 'cross between Isadora Duncan and Lawrence of Arabia'. As foreign secretary, Ms Truss imitated the Iron Lady 35 years later in 2021 when she posed riding a Challenger 2 tank in Tapa, Estonia. Other pictures from Mrs Badenoch's visit to the barracks showed her pointing an assault rifle directly at the chest of a soldier. Labour seized on the image and said the Tory leader had broken cadet rules that say 'a weapon must never be pointed at anyone in any circumstances'. The regulations add: 'A weapon must always be handled so that it points in such a direction that there is no danger if a round is accidentally fired.' A Labour source said: 'The reference to 'faulty or careless handling' in the guidance probably best describes her tenure as Tory leader.' A Conservative spokesman hit back by asking: 'What fun-hating, pettifogging grouch seriously thinks this is worth complaining about?'
Telegraph
20 hours ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
The real Starmer has this week revealed himself: a Corbynista in a Blairite suit
It's the spinelessness of it all that gets me. We knew Keir Starmer was weak. We knew it when he recorded a leadership pitch in 2020 that could have been directed by Ken Loach – only to emerge as some sort of budget Tony Blair impersonator in office. Deep down, we knew what we were getting; no one could have seriously believed the Prime Minister, a self-professed socialist who served so willingly under Jeremy Corbyn wouldn't do exactly this to the country. But did we think the capitulation would happen this quickly and under so little pressure? After 14 years of Conservative calamity, which left a trail of broken promises in its wake, people could have been forgiven for hoping this self-styled beacon of 'stability and moderation' would at least try to fulfil his pledge of a 'government unburdened by doctrine, guided only by a determination to serve your interests'. When he called, on the steps of Downing Street, for a 'return of politics to public service,' and vowed to 'tread more lightly on your lives', things were that bad that voters gave him the benefit of the doubt. After the horror of Covid, the cost of living crisis, the embarrassment of Liz Truss's premiership, and record numbers of illegal immigrants arriving here by boat, they thought to themselves: well, it can't get any worse. 'Country first, party second,' Starmer vowed and people thought, maybe, just maybe, this respectable lawyer would put the needs of the electorate first. But no. Instead we have ended up with something far worse than the Tories could ever muster. In Starmer, we have not just ended up with a Butlin's Blair but a cut-price Compo; a coward leading a craven cabinet. Until now, I thought lily-livered Labour was best summed up by Starmer's complete inability to say whether he supported the US air strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Kemi Badenoch was unequivocal in her support of Donald Trump's attempts to ensure we can no longer be nuked by murderous mullahs hellbent on wiping Israel from the map along with any of her allies. So was Nigel Farage. It shouldn't be a difficult question for any politician with the faintest concern for the preservation of western civilization. Still, handwringing Starmer struggled, calling for more negotiation with a regime that once described America as the Great Satan, murders women for removing their hijabs, throws gays off buildings and funds terrorist Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis to kill Jews (and anyone else in their path). So far, so invertebrate, and then, on Friday, Starmer took another step down the yellow brick road by giving an interview to the Left-leaning Observer, in which he expressed ' deep regret' for saying that Britain risked becoming an 'island of strangers ' because of mass migration. Insisting it 'wasn't right' to use 'that particular phrase' in a speech last month, despite No 10 previously insisting that he stood by his words, he said neither he nor his speechwriters had been aware that the remarks could have been interpreted as an echo of the language of Enoch Powell. 'I wouldn't have used those words if I had known they were, or even would be interpreted as, an echo of Powell. I had no idea – and my speechwriters didn't know either. 'But that particular phrase – no, it wasn't right. I'll give you the honest truth – I deeply regret using it.' Have you ever heard such weapons-grade gaslighting? If it wasn't gutless enough to be backtracking on the speech, to then suggest that no one in No 10 considered that it might be a bit Rivers of Bloodish is an insult to anyone with even the most rudimentary understanding of British politics. To make matters worse, Never Here Keir then went on to whine that he 'wasn't in the best state to make a big speech' because he'd just come back from a three-day trip to Ukraine. Boo hoo. Try being Volodymyr Zelenskyy for a week, you big sissy. Good grief. The mea culpa came less than 24 hours after he agreed to water down his controversial welfare reforms to stave off a massive rebellion. On Wednesday, covering for lesser spotted Starmer at PMQs, Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner insisted that the Government would not back down on its proposals to cut nearly £5 billion from the welfare bill by limiting access to disability payments. It took less than two days for Sir Keir to cave in, offering compromises that will wipe out at least a third of the savings the Chancellor had banked on making through welfare reform. After the similarly feeble U-turn on the winter fuel allowance cuts, tax rises now look like a certainty come the autumn Budget. So not only is the benefits bill going to continue to rise, working people are once again going to have to pay the price thanks to the inadequacy of our current administration. Almost a third of all income tax revenue and National Insurance contributions are being spent servicing the nation's total welfare budget which has ballooned by £86 billion compared to a decade ago, totalling £296 billion in 2023-24, the last year for available data. But instead of tackling this behemoth on behalf of a nearly bankrupt nation, Starmer has opted to save his own skin. It's not just spineless, it's shameful. We used to believe Britain under Blair was a Left-wing country. But how foolish that seems now, under his successor. Margaret Thatcher had created the conditions for people to work, to save, and to own their homes. People still believed in a 'hand up' and not a 'hand out'. Look at us now, once again expecting the state to solve all our problems. Aspiration, entrepreneurialism, good old fashioned graft; all these courageous qualities have been quashed by pusillanimous, progressive politicians living in a fantasyland where there are no trade-offs, just ever more government spending funded by soaking 'the rich''. And the worst of them all is socialist Starmer – a man with so little backbone he can't even stand up to his own MPs.
Telegraph
3 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
There could be a general election much earlier than you think
For a 24-year-old Tory, then working at a website called ConservativeHome, I was unreasonably happy the morning after last year's general election. I'm not a sadomasochist. 121 MPs was far more than I'd dare hope for; as the exit poll came through, I cheered that I still had a job. Among the many that lost their seats were plenty of my party's most useless MPs, up to and including one Liz Truss. But the number one reason for me to be cheerful, as Keir Starmer waved outside Number 10, landslide majority at his back, was I knew that this new Labour Government from its very first day was cooked. For those unfamiliar with it, 'cooked' is a Generation Z expression, meaning being exhausted or overwhelmed. It can also refer to being high on marijuana, but I don't think that applies here, except perhaps to explain how Ed Miliband generates his energy policies. Why was I convinced, at the point of my opponents' ultimate triumph, that they were already as good as plucked, stuffed, and roasting in the oven? Disdain, perhaps. Keir Starmer always struck me as little more than a late middle-aged man who quite wanted to be Prime Minister but didn't really know why. But the most obvious cause was the disconnect between the mandate the Government had received, the challenges it faced, and the patience of its new MPs. Ignore the 411 seats – an anomaly of the sort first-past-the-post throws out for fun. The real stat that had my eyebrows raised was the share of the vote Labour had received: 33.7 per cent. Not only was it far below what the opinion polls had predicted – little changed from Jeremy Corbyn's glorious 2019 defeat – but it was the lowest share of the vote for any majority Government ever. For a Government coming to power promising no plan more than an oblique promise of 'change', things were likely to turn sour quickly. That was especially the case for one confronting the same structural challenges – stagnation, a broken health service, and soaring immigration – that had riven the Tories and on which voters expected swift action. So it has proved. The current stand-off between Starmer and his backbenchers over welfare cuts is emblematic of this. More than 120 Labour MPs have now signed an amendment that would torpedo the Government's plans to make it harder to claim personal independent payments. The cuts would save a paltry £5 billion – a dust speck compared to an overall welfare budget of £313 billion. But it is too much for more than a quarter of Starmer's statist MPs. For a Government with a majority larger than any Margaret Thatcher ever enjoyed to be contemplating defeat on a signature piece of legislation within its first year is extraordinary. If the Prime Minister U-turns on this, as he has over the two-child benefit cap and on winter fuel payments, it will be a humiliating admission that his MPs will never will allow him to cut spending. Not only will the markets take fright; his authority would be shot. Like Theresa May during the Brexit wars, he would be in office but not in power. Starmer could can the legislation or chuck Rachel Reeves or Morgan McSweeney to the backbench wolves, falling back on the traditional excuse of all embattled monarchs: 'I was led astray by evil advice'. But paying the Danegeld has never been known to get rid of the Dane. No successor could be expected to do much better. They are trapped between a political rock and a fiscal hard place: between legions of Labour MPs who entered politics to do anything but vote through Austerity 2.0, and a bloated state limping ever close to bankruptcy as the population ages, growth remains anaemic, and the international scene continues to darken. With Labour MPs like this, how could we ever afford the £30-40 billion that Starmer's new 5 per cent of GDP defence pledge requires? It is a nonsense. So is this Government. Not even one year in, and it is extinct. With four more years to run down, it is bereft of any positive agenda, staggering from crisis to crises and rebellion to rebellion. For Labour MPs, wasting the next four years of their lives, it is a humiliation. But for the country they are failing to lead, it is a disaster. I could say I told you so. But our plight is far too dire. Labour's first year has been miserable. But things can only get worse.
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Notorious bare-knuckle fighter is recalled to prison just weeks after filming bizarre video with former PM Liz Truss to promote his new whisky
A notorious bare-knuckled fighter has been recalled to jail just weeks after teaming up with Liz Truss in a bizarre video promoting his new whisky. Convicted thug Dougie Joyce, from Manchester, appeared alongside the former Prime Minister in a clip filmed as she made a visit to Scunthorpe United's ground. Joyce was seen proudly handing her a bottle before saying his catchphrase, Just remember, Dougie Joyce loves ya' - before the ex-PM held it up and responded: 'Liz Truss loves you.' But MailOnline can now reveal he has been brought back behind bars, having been out on licence at the time of the video. It is understood that his recall is linked to the promotional stunt featuring Ms Truss. A spokesman for the politician, whose tenure in Number 10 lasted just 49 days in 2022, has said of her invovement: 'She attended the event to support the people working to regenerate the town and Scunthorpe FC.' Joyce is a boxer and bare-knuckle fighter from a traveller background who once boasted he was 'the next Tyson Fury' - but has been repeatedly jailed for violence offences, including in May last year. Now one source from Manchester has said of his prison recall: 'He must have pushed his luck too far with the Liz Truss video.' A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: 'Offenders released on licence are kept under close supervision and subject to strict conditions for the remainder of their sentence. If they break the rules, we will send them back to prison.' Joyce had shared photographs of his appearance alongside Ms Truss on his Instagram page, writing: 'It was a great honour to have former Prime Minister as a special guest. 'Having her there truly meant a lot and added a distinguished touch to the occasion.' Sources close to the former Prime Minister have insisted it was not a paid appearance. Joyce has been claiming to have turned over a new leaf, insisting he was devoting himself to charity work after being released from prison. He was previously jailed for 19 months in November 2023 after CCTV emerged showing him battering a pensioner in a Manchester pub. Burly Joyce had felled the old man inside the pub on Thomas Street, in the heart of Manchester's trendy Northern Quarter. A shocking video of the attack showed the traveller and businessman knock the recently widowed elderly man off his chair with three savage blows, before flooring him again after he got to his feet. After Joyce pointed to a lens and said, 'Just remember, Dougie Joyce loves ya', Ms Truss, who led the nation for 49 days in 2022, repeated his catchphrase while holding up a bottle The injuries to the man's face were exacerbated by the large golden pyramid ring he was wearing. At the time of Joyce's sentencing, Det Con Natalie Hollows said: 'Joyce is an aggressive and violent man.' And he was imprisoned again in May last year after finding himself involved in a violent brawl with a rival family at a wake. He and his brother Tom, 27, were handed the sentences for violent disorder by Manchester Crown Court after an incident at the Vine pub in the city's Collyhurst district. Chaos erupted in the pub for about half-an-hour as members of the Joyce and Doherty family clashed in the latest episode of a long-running feud. The two families had attended the establishment as part of a wake following the death of two young men who were part of the traveller community on October 2, 2020. Two members of the Doherty family were taken to hospital with 'significant injuries', one of whom Tom had struck on the head with a smashed beer bottle. Dougie was handed a 13-month jail term, while Tom was sentenced to 22 months in prison. Dougie Joyce has previously starred in an Amazon series about his family, including his former air hostess wife Holly, and was once filmed fighting with rival reality star Paddy Doherty. The couple got married in July 2022 in an extravagant £60,000 ceremony in Gorton Monastery that included four Rolls-Royces, a £12,000 dress and champagne on tap. Joyce had wanted to arrive in a helicopter but the venue would not allow him to park the aircraft in its car park. He also ran several successful business - including a bare-knuckle boxing promotion company, a bespoke furniture range and activewear companies as well as his alcohol brand Joyce's Irish Whiskey. Under current rules, freed convicts can be kept behind bars for the rest of their sentence if they are recalled to prison. But the Government's justice reform plans propose a new a standard 28-day 'recall' period for released offenders who are locked up again for breaking the rules – even those who commit new offences. The new policy is forecast to free up 1,400 spaces in prisons amid the overcrowding crisis - and officials have said if no action was taken, they would run out of space by November. But Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood has been accused of presiding over a 'recipe for the breakdown of law and order', while victims' groups voiced alarm. There were 13,600 recalled prisoners behind bars in March - with about a fifth being sent back to jail because they have committed fresh crimes. Ms Mahmood has said the 28-day recall period would apply to criminals serving sentences of between one and four years. She said last month: 'The consequences of failing to act are unthinkable. If our prisons overflow, courts cancel trials, police halt their arrests, crime goes unpunished and we reach a total breakdown of law and order.' But the Conservatives' Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick accused Labour of offering 'an invitation for dangerous criminals to cause carnage'. He added: 'By telling prisoners that they will never serve their full sentence, even if they reoffend, the Justice Secretary has removed an important deterrent.
