Latest news with #MsRayner
Daily Mail
7 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
QUENTIN LETTS: What will become of the builder who sends his labourer for two tins of tartan paint?
's monitors of workplace chit-chat have already been dubbed 'banter police' or 'banter tsars', but a different Russian word would be more accurate. After the Bolshevik revolution of 1917, military units had komissars who were enforcers for the regime. Given their power to denounce soldiers to the Soviet authorities, it wasn't long before they were heartily loathed. These komissars kept an eye on the ranks. They noted which men had an independent streak and they made sure any scepticism about the new political order did not spread. Light-hearted banter brightens most places of work. Life would become dull if we could not rib one another, devise nicknames and tease workmates when they goof. But under Ms Rayner's Bill, 'third-party harassment' will be reportable to and by diversity officers. The unifying benefits of banter will be lost to suffocating fear of propriety. Morale will be dented. Work will become more of a drudge. Is this really what Labour MPs want? Quite what constitutes 'harassment' will be for courts to decide. The lawyers are going to be busy, as will Ms Rayner's union allies. This law will also give trade union reps leverage over free-spirited souls who crack jokes at work. If those people pay their union dues, their indiscretions will no doubt be overlooked. But anyone who seems a bit too Right-wing or 'Brexity' will be fed into the procedural mangle. As for bosses, if they refuse to meet unions' pay demands, you can bet the banter komissars will find more incidents to report. My wife often works on a building site. She removes paint from doors and windows. 'Here's our stripper,' say her male workmates. She thinks this is a hoot, but you can see how a grievance-surfing lawyer could turn that into a demand for thousands in compensation. Construction sites are fruity places. She was once on all fours, helping a contractor fit some under-floor piping, and had to tell him, 'give me another inch'. Cue much ribald laughter. Under Ms Rayner's proposals it might not even require a complaint by the alleged victim of banter. Diversity officers could themselves decide to report any incidents, starting a legalistic process that will last months, ruin reputations and create untold stress. More money will be spent on human resources and training. There will be more rules, more anxiety, more suspicion, less freedom. I once worked at a warehouse where a forklift accidentally pronged a pallet of Brut 33 aerosols. What a stink. The forklift driver was the target of plenty of banter. Richly deserved it, too. My son, new to a labouring job, was dangled over a sewage pit by his ankles. A union rep might call that bullying but from that day my son felt part of the team. I know of another young lad who was sent off by his foreman to buy 'two tins of tartan paint, and holes for fence-posts'. He was told 'the holes aren't heavy but there's nothing to hold on to'. It was a while before he realised he was being asked to buy thin air. Likewise, he was told to 'go to the van and bring back a new bubble for the spirit-level'. The weird thing is that Ms Rayner is supposedly the one normal, working-class person in a Cabinet of wonks. In pressing for this mad law she is showing herself to be as out of touch as the rest of them. All because she is ambitious for the top job and wants to suck up to her union paymasters. How pathetic.
Daily Mail
7 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Angela Rayner to put 'BANTER POLICE' in your office: Watch what you say by the water cooler! Workers' rights Bill pressures firms to spy on 'inappropriate' conversations
has been accused of plotting to censor workplace banter by deploying a network of spies in businesses across the country. Under new laws drawn up by the Deputy Prime Minister, firms will be pressured into bankrolling 'diversity officers', whose jobs would include protecting staff from the content of overheard conversations. Last night, the Tories warned that the so-called 'banter police' would have a 'chilling effect' on businesses already struggling under the weight of high taxes and excess regulation under Labour. Under Ms Rayner's Employment Rights Bill, employers must try to protect their staff from harassment by third parties. It means, for example, that a worker could take an employer to tribunal if they feel jokes or banter they overhear was offensive on grounds such as race, sex or religion if their bosses didn't do 'all they could' to prevent it. That is likely to lead to firms taking on more diversity officers to monitor what people are saying to help them prove they had taken sufficient steps to protect their workers. The Bill fails to stipulate any ring fence allowing the expression of opinions on political, moral, religious or social matters – which the Tories said they would have insisted upon. Ms Rayner's legislation also paves the way to greater unionisation in the workplace, which companies fear will take Britain back to the dark days of the 1970s, making it more burdensome to employ workers and leaving the firms vulnerable to ruinous strikes. The Bill requires bosses to give trade union representatives time off for matters 'relating to equality in the workplace' – further adding to costs, and to the number of potential busybodies monitoring speech. Ms Rayner's political opponents point out that she has received thousands of pounds in donations from unions which will benefit from the legislation. Shadow Business Secretary Andrew Griffith said: 'Employers are already bleeding out because of Labour's war on business, and this will make matters much worse. Pressuring private firms to hire diversity officers to pursue woke agendas has so far gone under the radar – but it will be the final nail in the coffin for many. 'Innocent office banter will be spied on by wokerati thought police. These banter tsars will have a chilling effect in workplaces. 'We can already see in Rayner's own Whitehall department how taxpayers are footing the bill for this divisive political agenda. With her personally bankrolled by the unions, this is clearly a grubby deal that feathers both nests.' The number of employment tribunal claims relating to 'banter' in the workplace rose by 45 per cent in 2021 alone, and bosses fear the new legislations will cause this to spiral even faster. The changes would be a boon for outfits such as Inclusive Employers, which offers 'banter workplace training'. It states: 'Banter, when unchecked, can escalate into harmful behaviour, including bullying, harassment, and discrimination... Harmless banter can quickly cross the line and lead to more serious issues.' The new laws will also roll back moves by the last Conservative government to stop Whitehall spending taxpayers' money on 'diversity, equality and inclusion' initiatives. Central to the plans are the repeal of Tory trade union laws which will reduce the threshold for strike action and make union funding of the Labour Party automatic. It will also end zero-hours contracts, strengthen redundancy and flexible working rights and allow companies to be taken to employment tribunals even if the employees concerned do not want to sue. The laws will make it far easier for unions to infiltrate workplaces and to operate even if just 2 per cent of the staff join. The Bill says: 'Introducing explicit protections from third-party harassment will ensure that victims can be confident that they have recourse to legal redress if their employer has not taken all reasonable steps to protect them'. A government spokesman said: 'The Employment Rights Bill will not affect anyone's right to lawful free speech, which this Government stands firmly behind. 'Upsetting remarks do not fall within the definition of harassment. 'We are strengthening workplace protections to tackle harassment and protect employees from intimidating and hostile abuse as well as sexual harassment.' A government source added: 'Courts and tribunals will continue to be required to balance rights on the facts of each case, including the rights to free expression.'
Daily Mail
14-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Return to the 1970s as Angela Rayner's law could see walkouts triggered by just 10% of workforce
was last night accused of delivering a 'strikers' charter' with new laws which would allow industrial action to be triggered with the support of just 10 per cent of the workforce. Business leaders and political opponents say the Employment Rights Bill, currently being debated in the Lords, should be dubbed the 'Unemployment Bill' because of the burden it will place on already struggling companies. Last week, economic growth figures showed that the UK economy shrank by 0.3 per cent in April, worse than the 0.1 per cent decline predicted. In spite of this – as well as firms warning they are being pushed to breaking point by the Chancellor's £25 billion National Insurance raid – Deputy Prime Minister Ms Rayner is pressing ahead with plans to give staff enhanced employment rights. Central to the plans will be the repeal of Tory trade union laws which will reduce the threshold for strike action and make union funding of the Labour Party automatic – with an 'opt-in' provision – rather than optional. It is likely to see a return to the industrial unrest of the 1970s when strikes could be triggered by a small number of activists. Labour's own analysis says the Bill will cost businesses £4.5 billion a year, l ead to the loss of 50,000 jobs and increase prices in the shops. Union chiefs will also be given a legal right to enter any workplace to recruit and organise, while the 40 per cent vote threshold for union recognition could be slashed to just 2 per cent of staff. The laws pave the way for ministers to decree only one in 50 workers in a bargaining unit negotiating with employers would need to support a union in order for a formal process to start. When combined with the expected abolition of the 50 per cent turnout rule for a strike ballot, the Tories say action could be triggered by as few as one in ten workers. It means that, for example, in an office of 1,000 people, just nine employees could vote – and only five votes in favour – for a strike to be called. The Bill also includes an end to zero hours contracts; the right to unfair dismissal from the first day; strengthened collective redundancy rights; enhanced sick pay; stronger tipping rights; more family-friendly rights, and extra parental and bereavement leave rights. Shadow Business Secretary Andrew Griffith said: 'This Bill should be renamed the 'Unemployment Bill', because that is exactly what it will do. 'Unions will grind the country to a halt, causing havoc with strikes supported by just 10 per cent of the workforce. This is nothing but an extreme union charter that Rayner hopes will take us back to the 1970s. Once again, Labour are putting party first country second – and the grubby quid pro quo at the heart of the deal proves it.' Jonny Haseldine, head of business environment at the British Chambers of Commerce said the legislation 'does not strike the right balance' and provisions in the Bill would be 'deeply worrying for employers'. Mr Haseldine said: 'There's a high risk of consequences that could limit employment opportunities and economic growth. 'The Government needs to help businesses innovate and be more productive. By adding more restrictions the Bill jeopardises all of this – creating a lose-lose scenario for everyone.' He added: 'Planned changes to dismissal rules and trade union ballot thresholds, for example, are some of the critical areas that need to be revisited.' A government spokesman said: 'The old strike laws clearly didn't work, with the UK losing more days to industrial action than any year since the 1980s. Our Employment Rights Bill is fundamental to delivering our Plan for Change.'
Daily Mail
07-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Angela Rayner faces Labour backbench rebellion over her plans to build 1.5million new homes in England by 2029
could face a backbench rebellion from Labour MPs over the party's drive to build 1.5 million homes in England by 2029. The Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary is fronting the Government's 'radical' overhaul of the planning system, which aims to revive housing targets for local councils and 'get Britain building again'. Its plans would require 370,000 homes to be built each year, which industry leaders claim there is 'little chance' of reaching as figures show the party is already falling short of its target by 170,000. And now, in the latest a blow to Ms Rayner's housebuilding goals, one Labour MP has threatened to trigger civil war over his demands to find a 'progressive alternative' to parts of her proposals. Labour 's Chris Hinchliff has proposed a suite of changes to the Planning and Infrastructure Bill ahead of its debate in Parliament on Monday. The North East Hertfordshire MP has suggested arming town halls with the power to block developers' housebuilding plans, if they have failed to finish their previous projects. He has also suggested housebuilding objectors should be able to appeal against green-lit large developments, if they are not on sites which a council has set aside for building. Mr Hinchliff has claimed he does not 'want to rebel' but said he would be prepared to trigger a vote over his proposals. He added his ambition was for 'a progressive alternative to our planning system and the developer-led profit-motivated model that we have at the moment'. Mr Hinchliff said: 'Frankly, to deliver the genuinely affordable housing that we need for communities like those I represent, we just have to smash that model. 'So, what I'm setting out is a set of proposals that would focus on delivering the genuinely affordable homes that we need, empowering local communities and councils to have a driving say over what happens in the local area, and also securing genuine protection for the environment going forwards.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the current system results in 'speculative' applications on land which falls outside of councils' local housebuilding strategies, 'putting significant pressure on inadequate local infrastructure'. In his constituency, which lies between London and Cambridge, 'the properties that are being built are not there to meet local need', Mr Hinchliff said, but were instead 'there to be sold for the maximum profit the developer can make'. Asked whether his proposals chimed with the first of Labour's five 'missions' at last year's general election - 'growth' - he replied: 'If we want to have the key workers that our communities need - the nurses, the social care workers, the bus drivers, the posties - they need to have genuinely affordable homes. 'You can't have that thriving economy without the workforce there, but at the moment, the housing that we are delivering is not likely to be affordable for those sorts of roles. 'It's effectively turning the towns into commuter dormitories rather than having thriving local economies, so for me, yes, it is about supporting the local economy.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the 'bottleneck' which slows housebuilding 'is not process, it's profit'. Among the proposed reforms is a power for ministers to decide which schemes should come before councillors, and which should be delegated to local authority staff, so that committees can 'focus their resources on complex or contentious development where local democratic oversight is required'. Natural England will also be able to draft 'environmental delivery plans (EDPs)' and acquire land compulsorily to bolster conservation efforts. Mr Hinchliff has suggested these EDPs must come with a timeline for their implementation, and that developers should improve the conservation status of any environmental features before causing 'damage' - a proposal which has support from at least 43 cross-party MP backers. MPs will spend two days debating the Bill on Monday and Tuesday. Chris Curtis, the Labour MP for Milton Keynes North, warned that some of Mr Hinchliff's proposals 'if enacted, would deepen our housing crisis and push more families into poverty'. He said: 'I won't stand by and watch more children in the country end up struggling in temporary accommodation to appease pressure groups. No Labour MP should. 'It's morally reprehensible to play games with this issue. These amendments should be withdrawn.' The prospect of a backbench rebellion sparks another blow to the Government's housebuilding plans just one day after a report cast doubt on whether it would be able to meet its 2029 target at all. A bleak report by the Home Builders Federation yesterday showed Labour is falling short of its target by 170,000 homes a year. Industry leaders said the data was 'disastrous' and without urgent support from ministers there is 'little chance' of reaching the goal. Just 39,170 homes were given planning permission in England in the first three months of the year – the lowest quarterly figure since records began. That was a 55 per cent drop on the previous quarter and almost 32 per cent lower than a year earlier. The 225,067 units given approval in the 12 months to the end of March was the worst performance in 12 years. The federation said its data 'starkly illustrates the urgent need for Government to address the barriers to housing supply' if they are to get 'anywhere near the much-vaunted' target.
Daily Mail
22-05-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
Angela Rayner 'calls for migrant benefits to be slashed' and urges Rachel Reeves to make changes - after Deputy PM challenged Chancellor's economic approach
called for migrant benefits to be slashed and urged Rachel Reeves to make changes, it has been reported, after the Deputy PM challenged the Chancellor's economic approach. Bold proposals, outlined in a leaked memo revealed by The Telegraph, also suggested making it harder for immigrants to receive Universal credit. Ms Rayner even said Labour should raise the fee migrants pay to use the NHS, in policies she and her team claimed were 'contentious' but still 'worthy of consideration'. Under current policies, introduced under the Tories in 2015, foreigners on work visas pay to access healthcare - a fee currently set at £1,035. The 'radical' policies further included limiting access to the state pension. The latest revelations come after Ms Reeves was hit with a triple blow to her authority. The Deputy PM suggested launching the plans in the Spring Statement - and hoping to get them over the line by the Autumn Budget. 'Migrants who have spent five to 10 years in the UK generally receive access to a broad range of welfare entitlements,' a section read, as reported by the broadsheet. 'Indefinite leave to remain in the UK confers access to core welfare entitlements such as Universal Credit, and 10 years of National Insurance contributions confers eligibility for some state pension provision. 'Those who arrived in the UK during the period of very high immigration in the past few years will become eligible for indefinite leave to remain over the course of this Parliament.' On a humiliating day for the Chancellor, alongside Ms Rayner challenging her economic approach Sir Keir Starmer U-turned on winter fuel cash and official figures showed a jump in inflation. The Chancellor was out of the country at a G7 meeting in Canada as the Prime Minister announced a screeching reverse on her hated decision to axe the winter fuel payment for 10 million pensioners. Left-wing Labour MPs rallied behind Ms Rayner's demand, prompting the Tories to claim that the Cabinet was in 'open warfare' over taxes. Kemi Badenoch taunted Sir Keir that his deputy was 'on manoeuvres' and 'calling the shots' on the economy. The third setback for the Chancellor came in the form of official figures showing that inflation jumped to 3.5 per cent last month, despite Ms Reeves's claim she is tackling the cost of living. Her controversial decision to means test winter fuel payments was widely blamed for the party's disastrous performance at the local elections and Runcorn and Helsby by-election on May 1. Sir Keir yesterday pledged to widen eligibility for the payments, which are worth up to £300. But, on a chaotic day, his officials were unable to say who would benefit and when they would receive the cash. During clashes in the Commons, Tory leader Mrs Badenoch told the PM: 'There is open warfare in his Cabinet. The Deputy Prime Minister is clearly calling the shots. 'What have we learned? We are heading for new tax rises. We know that inflation is up. It is just more and more bad news from a Prime Minister who has lost control.' Labour backbenchers welcomed the partial U-turn last night, but warned it would not be enough to quell a rebellion over the benefit cuts next month that are opposed by Ms Rayner. Her intervention is likely to embolden MPs demanding the end of the two-child benefit cap, the scrapping of the Chancellor's fiscal rules and the introduction of some form of wealth tax. Allies denied that the Deputy PM was trying to position herself as a champion of the Left with an eye to a future leadership bid. But one said she was sick of defending controversial cuts, adding: 'She's had to eat a lot of s***'. Former frontbencher Andy McDonald said a lot of his colleagues 'are concerned that the Chancellor's fiscal rules and spending cut proposals hit those on lower incomes'. He said: 'Proposals to increase tax revenue from the wealthy would make tax fairer and support public services.' Neil Duncan-Jordan, Labour MP for Poole, told the BBC the proposals to increase taxes were 'absolutely' among things the Government should be considering. And Jon Trickett said the winter fuel cuts were 'a major error' and 'ought to be reversed in total now'. Ms Rayner wrote to the Chancellor in March, ahead of the Spring Statement, proposing eight tax increases, The Daily Telegraph revealed yesterday. They included reinstating the pensions lifetime allowance, changes to dividend taxes, a raid on the million people who pay the additional rate of income tax and a higher corporation tax level for banks. Last night it emerged that Ms Rayner also urged Ms Reeves to consider making it harder for immigrants to access the state pension and benefits. The timing of the leak has also raised eyebrows, coming just a few weeks before Ms Reeves announces real terms cuts in spending for several government departments – including Ms Rayner's Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall and Environment Secretary Steve Reed yesterday insisted the Cabinet were 'united' on the economy. Asked whether she agreed with Ms Rayner that rather than slash benefits she should hike taxes on high earners and savers, Ms Kendall told reporters: 'The entire Cabinet backs Rachel's economic strategy to grow the economy, drive up living standards, increase jobs. We actually have raised taxes on some of the richest in this country.' Ms Kendall insisted benefits cuts were essential, regardless of the strains on the public finances. She is planning a £5billion package of cuts, which will make it harder to claim disability payments. It will be voted on in the Commons next month and as many as 170 Labour MPs could rebel. In a speech yesterday, Ms Kendall insisted she was listening to her colleagues' concerns, but said: 'Whatever the fiscal position that the Government faces, the system as a whole needs to change. We are an older, sicker nation – we have more people with disabilities and health conditions. 'I don't think the welfare state in its broadest sense is meeting that challenge.' She added: 'I'm not doing this to be tough, I'm doing this because I believe there is a better way to transform people's lives.' A source close to the Chancellor said last night: 'Under this Chancellor we have secured the highest growth of any major economy since the start of the year, four interest cuts helping millions of homeowners, secured three trade deals and given millions of people a pay rise.'
