logo
ENFRع
#

Latest news with #governmentCuts

Wednesday briefing: ​​Has Starmer's welfare reform bill victory left a fractured Labour party in its wake?
Wednesday briefing: ​​Has Starmer's welfare reform bill victory left a fractured Labour party in its wake?

The Guardian

time02-07-2025

  • Politics
  • The Guardian

Wednesday briefing: ​​Has Starmer's welfare reform bill victory left a fractured Labour party in its wake?

Good morning. To his loveless landslide, Keir Starmer can now add a vapid victory. Last night, the government's flagship welfare reform bill passed its second reading in the House of Commons by 335 votes to 260 – a majority of 75. But after last-minute concessions from the government to secure the bill's passage, a set of measures whose intended savings had already fallen from £5bn to £2.5bn a year, now looks like recouping much closer to nothing. The central climbdown, where plans for deep cuts to the personal independence payment (Pip) in the future were shelved, has been celebrated by disabled people and the charities who represent them. They had feared that the support they rely on was about to be ripped away. But it is also a measure of how disastrous the whole process has been for Starmer. Ministers will defend the changes as an important first step this morning – but given the scale of the initial proposals and the insistence that they were essential to save the welfare state for future generations, the last-minute excision of the measures at the very heart of the undertaking looks extraordinary. To get to such a negligible result has come at the cost of significant damage to Starmer's parliamentary authority, and his reputation for competence. So where did No 10 go wrong? And how important will the diluted version of the bill now prove to be? For today's newsletter, I spoke to the Guardian's political editor, Pippa Crerar, about the biggest rebellion the government has faced so far. Here are the headlines. Israel-Gaza war | Donald Trump says that Israel has accepted conditions of a ceasefire after US-Israeli talks and urged Hamas to agree. The US president did not give details of the terms and there is no indication that Hamas will accept them. NHS | Three bosses at the hospital where Lucy Letby worked have been arrested on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter, police have said. The three, who have not been named, were arrested as part of the investigation into the actions of leaders at the Countess of Chester hospital. UK news | The home secretary is coming under increasing pressure to abandon plans to ban Palestine Action, as UN experts and hundreds of lawyers warned that proscribing the group would conflate protest and terrorism. US news | The jury in the high-profile federal sex-trafficking and racketeering conspiracy trial of Sean 'Diddy' Combs concluded the day without a verdict on Tuesday, unable to come to a decision on one of the five counts. The judge advised the jury to 'keep deliberating'. Extreme heat | Outdoor working has been banned during the hottest parts of the day in more than half of Italy's regions, as an extreme heatwave that has smashed June temperature records in Spain and Portugal continues to grip large swathes of Europe. Downing Street's victory appears to have come at the cost of almost everything it claimed to be working for – and if officials understood they had a fight on their hands over the welfare reforms when they were first tabled in March, they would now concede that they completely misjudged the scale. Over the last 10 days, the internal Labour fight over the measures set out in the bill has put more than 120 MPs on record as prepared to rebel; extracted meaningful concessions that drastically reduce its fiscal impact; and ultimately resulted in a package reduced to the bare bones. To the government's critics on the left and among disabled people, it is a much better piece of legislation as a result. But it is also a kind of zombie bill: looks like the real thing at a distance, but dead behind the eyes when you examine it closely. Quite apart from the policy ramifications, Pippa Crerar said, the political damage – and the sense that a big enough rebellion limits No 10's disciplinary options – will be lasting. 'The whips were warning for a long time that MPs were upset enough to rebel, but that appears to have been dismissed in Downing Street,' Pippa said. 'Now some of them have a taste for it. And it's fair to say that this bill has been hollowed out.' What happened in the vote? At the beginning of the day, it looked like Downing Street was on course to prevail, albeit by a much slimmer margin than it might once have hoped. But the concessions that came later appeared to indicate Keir Starmer became extremely nervous the government would lose. Kiran Stacey and Jessica Elgot have an excellent account of how things changed in the meantime. 'There were a lot of people saying they were going to wait to see what Liz Kendall said at the dispatch box, or that they would be talking to colleagues about their strategy,' Pippa said. Only a couple of hours before the reversal, Kendall was telling MPs that the changes to the Pip system would go ahead as planned. 'This is a humiliation for her,' Pippa added. 'The U-turn was basically stitched up behind her back, and she wasn't aware of it until the last minute. I wouldn't be surprised if she was privately extremely angry.' In the end, 49 Labour MPs still voted against the government, three times the previous largest rebellion. 'I watched much of the Commons debate, and it was clear that MPs were still deeply unhappy,' Pippa said. 'Angela Rayner was leading the discussions with the committee chairs who led the previous rebellion, and they told her they felt MPs were in no mood to accept the offer as it was. Whether, when push came to shove, they would have voted against the government was something Keir Starmer clearly didn't want to test.' How have the concessions changed the bill's impact on disabled people? In response to the threat of rebellion, the government laid out changes to the proposed reforms to the benefit system that will have a significant impact. Here are the most important ones – and here's a useful guide by Kiran Stacey, published before the last-minute additions, if you want more detail. Existing claimants of the personal independence payment (Pip) – the main working-age benefit for people with disabilities, whether they are working or not – will continue to receive the same amount. But, crucially, the government bowed to rebel demands that any changes for future new claimants will not be made before the findings of a review of the Pip assessment criteria conducted by welfare minister Stephen Timms. The process is meant to be 'co-produced' by disabled people and the organisations that represent them. That means it is highly unlikely to propose the kinds of cuts that the government had envisioned. Timms said yesterday that the review is 'not intended to save money'. 'That was the only concession left that could guarantee the vote would go through,' Pippa said. 'It leaves open the possibility that the biggest changes envisioned by the original bill will never actually happen.' Plans to freeze the health-related component of universal credit, the main benefit for people out of work, were reversed for existing claimants, and the amount will now rise in line with inflation. What remains of the UC changes for future claimants is effectively the only major part of the original bill that survives. A £1bn investment in schemes to help disabled and long-term sick people back into work has been brought forward from the end of the parliament to this year. Until the additional last-minute changes on future Pip payments, the government plans were still expected to push 150,000 more people into relative poverty, modelling by the Department for Work and Pensions said – down from the 250,000 thus affected by the original scheme. A new calculation will now be needed, but the number is likely to be far smaller. How does the final bill's fiscal impact compare with the original plan? The initial plan would have reduced the annual increase in welfare spending by about £5bn; with the changes made to secure backbench support before yesterday, the figure was about £2.5bn. The Resolution Foundation says that with yesterday's changes, and given any theoretical savings following the Timms review can not yet be costed, it now amounts to a slight increase in spending by the end of the decade. Rachel Reeves is therefore left with a large hole to fill in her autumn budget – together with the reversal on some of the cuts to winter fuel payments, a total of at least £6bn. 'Growth is slow, she's ruled out borrowing more, and she doesn't want to be seen as an austerity chancellor,' Pippa said. 'And I think she would rather walk than break her fiscal rules. All of that points towards tax rises – it's hard to find anyone in the Treasury who will rule that out.' Reeves is 'more politically astute than she gets credit for,' Pippa added. 'People in the Treasury recognised last week that something would have to be offered to get the bill through. But there is frustration that Keir Starmer makes a decision, and Reeves then has to make it work. And beyond the current debate, there was a suggestion that they intended to come back later this year for more from the welfare budget.' That clearly now looks politically impossible. What happens next? Getting the bill through will be described as a victory by the government – but Starmer's tone to cabinet yesterday told a different story: 'We will learn from our mistakes, but we will not turn on each other.' Even now, the bill's eventual ascent to the status of law is not guaranteed: it still has to go through the committee and report stages, presenting further opportunities for scrutiny, amendment, and painful political confrontation, before coming back to the House of Commons a final time. The best hope for the government now, Pippa said, is that 'the Timms review, alongside disability groups, can come up with reforms that are acceptable to Labour MPs but also make meaningful reforms to the welfare system – I've not met a single MP who doesn't recognise that some degree of reform is needed.' But even in that optimistic view, the truth is that the extent of the disquiet – particularly when No 10 has imposed stern disciplinary measures on rebels in the past – may suggest a broader problem. 'The relationship between the parliamentary Labour party and Downing Street has been damaged,' Pippa said. 'There is a lot of work to do to rebuild those bridges.' Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion If Starmer wants to avoid similar crises in the future, he may ask who is at fault for this one. Some critics have pointed to Morgan McSweeney, the all-powerful Downing Street chief of staff, who has insisted that MPs are out of touch with the mood of the country on this issue. But while criticisms of McSweeney appear increasingly urgent, Starmer defended him in cabinet yesterday. 'You can't blame it all on one man,' Pippa said. 'He is a lightning rod, but there is a whole operation around him. Ultimately, as ever, the buck stops with the prime minister himself.' While the world's attention was on Iran and Israel during their 12 day war, the IDF attacks in Gaza continued and the humanitarian crisis deteriorated even further. This timeline of what happened in Gaza is essential reading. Aamna Do not bring Anna Karenina to Tenerife, is Daisy Buchanan's first tip in this guide to beach reading, which argues for reading something less strenuous. (Another tip: give yourself permission to ditch a book if you're hating it.) Archie The modern world keeps us home and alone, but Dylan B Jones finds that you don't need complicated tactics or new hobbies or psychological instruction to improve your social life. Aamna The disaster of the welfare bill is only an emblem of a wider problem, writes Rafael Behr – and to have any hope of righting the ship, Keir Starmer must start thinking about the parts of his coalition on the left that have found him so sorely disappointing. Archie I loved this interview by Sundus Abdi on three young Londoners who journeyed to their parents' homelands, redefining the travel vlog along the way. Aamna Tennis | Coco Gauff failed to follow up her French Open triumph, losing 7-6, 6-1 to Dayana Yastremska in the biggest upset of Wimbledon so far. Britain's Jack Draper progressed to the second round after his opponent Sebastián Báez retired with a leg injury with Draper two sets up. Football | The Women's Euro 2025 is finally here. But who's favoured to win, and who'll be top scorer? Guardian sports writers share their tournament predictions. Football | Gonzalo García scored the only goal for Real Madrid against Juventus in the last 16 of the Club World Cup. The result takes Madrid through to the quarter-finals, where they will meet Borussia Dortmund. Keir Starmer's dramatic climbdown on the centrepiece of his welfare bill dominates headlines. The Guardian splashes on 'Welfare bill passes as bruised PM backtracks to avert Labour revolt.' the Mirror goes with 'Welfare Bill fiasco: No winners,' while for the Telegraph it's 'Starmer's benefits bill turns to farce,' and the Express has 'Now it's 'utter capitulation' over PM's welfare bill.' The i Paper leads with 'Labour rebels force Starmer to retreat on benefits cuts again – amid chaos in the Commons' and the FT has 'Starmer guts welfare reform to avert defeat in Commons.' The Sun splashes on 'Buggy useless,' on French police riding in UK-funded buggies to patrol migrant crossing areas, while the Mail has '20,000 this year … and counting' on crossings. The Metro leads with 'Harvey: Dad, I'm scared to go to school' as a court hears what Harvey Willgoose, 15, said before he was fatally stabbed by another pupil in Sheffield. A humiliating day for Keir Starmer in parliament Helen Pidd talks to Kiran Stacey and a host of Labour MPs on a day of high drama in Westminster, as parliament votes on the government's proposed disability cuts. A bit of good news to remind you that the world's not all bad In the Western Ghats of India, a remarkable all-female team is reviving rainforest biodiversity at the Gurukula Botanical Sanctuary. While these women don't have degrees in conservation, they're showing the extraordinary things that can be achieved through deep knowledge that is acquired through decades of hard work. These women have turned degraded land into a living sanctuary – a so-called 'Noah's ark' – for thousands of native species, including corpse flowers and carnivorous plants. Their rewilding efforts now protect up to 40% of the region's plant life. 'We're restoring nature's agency to heal itself,' says Suprabha Seshan, who oversees the restoration. 'And then we are supporting certain species by working with nature's agency.' Sign up here for a weekly roundup of The Upside, sent to you every Sunday And finally, the Guardian's puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow. Quick crossword Cryptic crossword Wordiply

Budget Day: Government looks to make its promises add up
Budget Day: Government looks to make its promises add up

RNZ News

time21-05-2025

  • Business
  • RNZ News

Budget Day: Government looks to make its promises add up

The Budget will reveal just how much money will be cut from various services and where the money will go instead. Photo: RNZ "It feels like a kid robbing his mum to pay for his mates" says library assistant Alex Cass, as she prepares for the government to reveal Budget 2025. New Zealanders will find out on Thursday just how much money will be cut from various services, as the government looks to make its promises add up. Just how much is saved from the pay equity law changes - and where that money will be going instead - will also be revealed. Cass was part of a pay equity claim scrapped due to the government's last-minute law change. "It's unbelievably underhanded the way this process has been done. It was done lightning fast, with no chance for any of us to object. It's incredibly cruel, and it's a legacy of cruelty." Cass felt like the government was saying to those who are fighting for their work to be taken seriously, "you don't deserve better". She said she would be on Parliament's lawn on Thursday afternoon to react to the budget - money she said the government got from people who were "already massively underpaid". But Nicola Willis said New Zealanders were "realistic", because the new scheme would still deliver a scheme protecting women against sex-based discrimination. Finance Minister Nicola Willis is primed to unveil her "no BS" budget. Photo: RNZ She said "every single cent" reprioritised from money reallocated from those claims would go into "priorities for New Zealand". "I've had it with opposition politicians who keep promising they can 'do it all', that somehow they're gonna stick to the debt levels, they're not gonna have deficits but also they're not gonna make savings and they're gonna spend on everything - that doesn't add up," said Willis. "Our approach is different" she said. "It's about prioritising your taxpayer money carefully and ensuring that we're actually nourishing the growth that ultimately delivers the jobs and living standards we all depend on." For this budget, the government's given itself only $1.3 billion of new money to use on day-to-day spending. Already $2.5b is needed for yearly cost increases and more than $3b has been allocated in pre-budget announcements for health, defence, social investment, state abuse survivor redress and the screen production rebate. "It's not a budget filled with rainbows and unicorns," Willis said, "It's a reality budget that will deliver genuine hope for the future." She also called it a "no BS" budget, but would not specify what that stood for. Labour leader Chris Hipkins said "paying women properly" should not be described as "rainbows and unicorns". "Making sure women who have been underpaid are paid what they're worth is something that a responsible government should prioritise - this government isn't." Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick says it does look like a "BS" budget. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said it did look like a "BS" budget. "The government has decided it is going to be cutting public services to the bone in order to pay for its landlord and tobacco tax cuts of the last budget." Council of Trade Unions economist Craig Renney, who is also on the Labour Party's policy council, said the government did not have much to work with given it would not borrow more money. "We're cutting government services at a time when we know there's increasing demand on those services," he said. "We have an increasingly elderly population. We have increasingly higher needs in terms of health and education." Now is the time, he said, to invest in the economy and inject some confidence into the economy. Renney said despite the government saying it would not cut frontline services, New Zealanders were finding it harder to access those frontline services. "It's not that there's a direct cut, but because these services aren't being properly funded for change, they're having to work harder and harder to deliver the same services with less real cash available to them." In the budget, he will be looking out for how the government has chosen to use the savings from stopping the pay equity claims. He will also be looking at Treasury's estimates for what is happening to unemployment, wages and the cost of living. "We've actually seen wages rising far less quickly than in the past, and we've seen two years of cuts to the minimum wage in real terms, and we've seen rising unemployment. "If those trends continue, that will suggest that the medicine and the pain of economic change is really being borne by workers, in particular, low-paid workforces, rather than by others in the economy who might have broader shoulders." He also will be looking to see if the government changes KiwiSaver settings, or begins means-testing for the winter energy payment or BestStart. "If it tries to do all of those to balance the books, we'll be asking why is it that these workers are having to pay the price for the fact that the government hasn't been able to deliver its fiscal plan to date." New Zealand Initiative chief economist Dr Eric Crampton said the government should focus on getting spending back down to pre-Covid levels. New Zealand Initiative chief economist Dr Eric Crampton. Photo: Supplied He wanted to know where the government was planning on reducing expenditure to deal with its deficit. "If it's simply tighter spending allowances over the next few years, you start wondering how credible it is as a path to get out of structural deficit. "Pulling the government out of the provision of some services, or explicitly cutting the amount that's provided, would signal a more serious approach." Crampton was interested to see Treasury's projections of future paths for government spending, and for productivity and GDP growth, as well as government spending priorities. "I'm watching for the tweaks the government might make to align the budget with the economic growth agenda. "There has been talk of changes in depreciation schedules to encourage private investment." He also pointed to a coalition agreement promise between National and ACT to provide housing incentive payments to councils, asking if it would show up in the budget "at least as a forecast for next year". "The government would need to make fiscal room for it. But it is important if the government wants councils to welcome urban growth." The Finance Minister has confirmed she will not be making any changes to superannuation. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

The President Will Destroy You Now
The President Will Destroy You Now

New York Times

time20-05-2025

  • Politics
  • New York Times

The President Will Destroy You Now

One thing stands out amid all the chaos, corruption and disorder: the wanton destructiveness of the Trump presidency. The targets of Trump's assaults include the law, higher education, medical research, ethical standards, America's foreign alliances, free speech, the civil service, religion, the media and much more. J. Michael Luttig, a former federal appeals court judge appointed by President George H.W. Bush, succinctly described his own view of the Trump presidency, writing by email that there has never before Some of the damage Trump has inflicted can be repaired by future administrations, but repairing relations with American allies, the restoration of lost government expertise and a return to productive research may take years, even with a new and determined president and Congress. Let's look at just one target of the administration's vendetta, medical research. Trump's attacks include cancellation of thousands of grants, cuts in the share of grants going to universities and hospitals; and proposed cuts of 40 percent or more in the budgets of the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Science Foundation. 'This is going to completely kneecap biomedical research in this country,' Jennifer Zeitzer, deputy executive director at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, told Science Magazine. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, warned that cuts will 'totally destroy the nation's public health infrastructure.' I asked scholars of the presidency to evaluate the scope of Trump's wreckage. 'The gutting of expertise and experience going on right now under the blatantly false pretext of eliminating fraud and waste,' Sean Wilentz, a professor of history at Princeton, wrote by email, 'is catastrophic and may never be completely repaired.' I asked Wilentz whether Trump was unique with respect to his destructiveness or if there were presidential precedents. Wilentz replied: Another question: Was Trump re-elected to promote an agenda of wreaking havoc, or is he pursuing an elitist right-wing program created by conservative ideologues who saw in Trump's election the opportunity to pursue their goals? Wilentz's reply: I asked Andrew Rudalevige, a political scientist at Bowdoin, how permanent the mayhem Trump has inflicted may prove to be. 'Not to be flip,' Rudalevige replied by email, 'but for children abroad denied food or lifesaving medicine because of arbitrary aid cuts the answer is already distressingly permanent.' From a broader perspective, Rudalevige wrote: I sent the question I posed to Wilentz to other scholars of the presidency. It produced a wide variety of answers. Here is Rudalevige's: Another question: How much is Trump's second term agenda the invention of conservative elites and how much is it a response to the demands of Trump's MAGA supporters? 'Trump is not at all an unwitting victim,' Rudalevige wrote, 'but those around him with wider and more systemic goals have more authority and are better organized in pursuit of those goals than they were in the first term.' In this context, Rudalevige continued, the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 In the past, when presidential power has expanded, Rudalevige argued, One widely shared view among those I queried is that Trump has severely damaged American's relations with traditional allies everywhere. Mara Rudman, a professor at the University of Virginia's Miller Center, wrote in an email: Trump is not unique in his destructiveness, in Rudman's view, Trump's second term agenda, Rudman argued, is elite-driven: Bruce Cain, a political scientist at Stanford, shares the belief that Trump has taken a wrecking ball to foreign relations. Cain emailed me his assessment: Similarly, Cain continued, Cain argued that in both economics and politics, destruction can have beneficial results, but not in the case of Donald Trump. Musk and Trump, in Cain's view, 'are driven more by instinct than knowledge, vindictiveness than good intentions and impatience than carefully designed plans.' They In ranking the most destructive presidents, the scholars I contacted mentioned both Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan. Geoffrey Kabaservice, vice president for political studies at the Niskanen Center, a center-left libertarian think tank, wrote by email: Paul Rosenzweig, a former deputy assistant secretary for policy in the Department of Homeland Security under George W. Bush and a lecturer in law at George Washington University, was even more pessimistic, writing in an email that he fears that Rosenzweig believes that I asked the experts I contacted whether Trump was laying the groundwork for a more autocratic form of government in the United States. Robert Strong, a professor of political economy at Washington and Lee, replied by email: From a different vantage point, Ellen Fitzgerald, a professor of history at the University of New Hampshire, questioned the value of trying to determine 'whether Trump is the most corrupt and/or most destructive president in U.S. history.' Such evaluations Despite those cautions, Fitzpatrick acknowledged that 'it's fair to say that if we look at the arc of American history from Reconstruction to the current day, there's no question that Trump is busily destroying much of what several generations of Americans worked very, very hard to achieve.' 'The anti-immigrant sentiment of the late 19th and early twentieth century,' Fitzpatrick wrote, and 'the rhetoric abroad in the land today': Some of those I questioned argued that Trump's assault on American institutions and values is not supported by most of his voters. Russell Riley, professor of ethics and co-chairman of the Miller Center's Presidential Oral History Program, took this view a step farther, noting that Trump explicitly dissociated himself from Project 2025 during the campaign and then, once in office, adopted much of the Project 2025 agenda: Trump, in contrast, 'barely won the popular vote, with just under 50 percent — hardly an electoral mandate, even for an incremental program. Indeed as a candidate Mr. Trump openly distanced himself from Project 2025.' Lacking both a clear mandate and an electorate explicitly supportive of Project 2025, Riley argued, means The reality, however, is that the abdication of power by Republicans in Congress has allowed Trump to create a mandate out of whole cloth. Where will this frightening development take us? The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store