Davey vows to challenge Farage and calls for ‘Swedish-style' budget changes
In a wide-ranging speech, the Liberal Democrat leader accused his Reform UK rival of having 'no answers' to the problems facing Britain and said voters 'can't bank on anything that man says'.
He also set out calls for a major shake-up of economic and net-zero policy, including a Swedish-style approach to Government whereby MPs are allowed to debate tax and spend changes – and propose alternatives and amendments – before the measures are finalised.
Speaking at the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) in central London, Sir Ed said his party had considered its proposed reforms carefully beneath the headline announcements.
Asked if a focus on technical detail would cut through to voters enough to combat a populist threat in the polls, he said: 'The truth is, Nigel Farage has no answer, right?
'Nigel Farage will tell you about all the problems, but when you ask him about his answers, he's just got nothing to say.'
He added: 'We've got to hold these people to account for getting away with their snake-oil sales… the difference with us is we have thought through the policies underneath the headlines, which is why people can bank on them.
'They can't bank on anything that man says.'
Asked if he saw Reform UK as the main political threat, Sir Ed said: 'He has to be taken on… I think he keeps misleading people.'
The Lib Dem leader said Mr Farage's approach to renewable power 'would only benefit foreign dictators like Vladimir Putin'.
He unveiled a package of pledges which he claimed could cut energy bills in half within 10 years, including a proposed switch of all green power contracts on to a subsidy scheme guaranteeing generators a fixed price.
Such contracts for difference (CfD), awarded at a Government auction, would mean the 'link can be broken' between electricity costs and market fluctuations caused by the price of gas, Sir Ed said.
He also proposed an Office for the Taxpayer, based in Parliament and designed to hold policy-makers to account, a 'bespoke' UK-EU customs union, an 'economic coalition of the willing' aimed at fostering more international trade, and a tougher approach to US President Donald Trump.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
6 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Tory opponents of Angela Rayner's strikers charter will celebrate ‘Norman Tebbit Day' in honour of Margaret Thatcher's union-bashing ally
Opponents of Angela Rayner 's controversial new industrial laws will tomorrow celebrate 'Norman Tebbit Day' in honour of Margaret Thatcher 's late union-bashing ally. Tory peers will use a debate in the Lords to try to amend Ms Rayner's Employment Rights Bill, which critics say will make it harder to employ workers, leave businesses vulnerable to strikes and force firms to employ diversity officers to censor conversations they deem inappropriate. The Bill also contains a raft of other measures. They include the end of zero-hours contracts, strengthened redundancy rights, more flexible working and the power for ministers to take companies to employment tribunals on behalf of employees – even if they do not want to sue. The peers are planning to amend measures granting access rights for union officials, and new electronic balloting which would make it easier for union reps to persuade workers to back industrial action. Lord Tebbit, who died aged 94 on July 7, led Mrs Thatcher's drive to restrict the unions' ability to bring industrial action. He described Marxist totalitarians in unions as 'small in number, anti-democratic forces [which] have gained great power through the trades union movement'. The peers are also expected to raise fears that hostile states such as Russia, Iran and North Korea could cyber-hack the e-ballots. As The Mail on Sunday revealed earlier this month, under the Bill employers must protect their staff from harassment by third parties. It means, for example, that a worker could take an employer to a 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 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. Shadow Business Secretary Andrew Griffith said: 'Angela Rayner's extreme union charter will take us right back to the 1970s, a period Norman Tebbit fought tooth and nail to drag Britain out of. 'These laws will see the unions run rife, strangle private enterprise and grind the country to a halt. 'Most worryingly are measures which risk industrial sabotage. This goes against everything Tebbit fought for, and must be stopped at once'.
BBC News
36 minutes ago
- BBC News
Yvette Cooper pledges new power to stop violent attackers after Southport
The home secretary says a powerful new crime to target suspects who are found to be preparing mass killings will ensure their plotting is taken as seriously as Cooper said the criminal justice system had to be given new tools to respond to violence-fixated individuals who are not motivated by a particular ideology, in the wake of the Southport attack last suspects who take steps towards an attack can be jailed for life, even if their plans are not fully told the BBC that the government will "close the gap" between such offenders and lone, violence-obsessed individuals by giving police the power to apprehend them long before they can act. Axel Rudakubana is serving a life sentence for murdering three girls when he attacked a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport almost a year others girls were seriously injured, along with two adults who tried to stop the police found he had been researching a target prior to the attack, they could not have arrested and charged him with a serious offence because he had no ideological motive linked to the definition of to BBC Radio 4's State of Terror series, which charts the response to violent extremism over the 20 years since the 7/7 bombings, Cooper said the police will get the power to prevent such individuals who do not have a clear ideology, in the same way they can with terror suspects. "There is a gap in the law around the planning of mass attacks that can be just as serious [as terrorism] in their implications for communities, their impact, the devastation that they can cause and the seriousness of the crime," she said."We will tighten legislation so that that is taken as seriously as terrorism."Cooper said the plan - which was briefly announced in March but not fleshed out until now - was for the new law to be similar to the exceptionally serious crime of preparing for acts of legislation, brought in after the 2005 London bombings, is a vital counter-extremism tool that has jailed dozens of allows the police to arrest a terror suspect for the steps they take to prepare for an attack - such as researching a it stipulates that there must also be evidence the preparation is linked to an ideological cause, such as support of a group banned under terrorism laws. The planned non-terror offence would apply to a far wider range of scenarios, including the activity of individuals like Nicholas Prosper. He had been planning a mass school shooting before he was apprehended for murdering his said: "We've seen cases of growing numbers of teenagers potentially radicalising themselves online and seeing all kinds of extremist material online in their bedrooms."They're seeing a really distorted and warped online world."We have to make sure that that the systems can respond while not taking our eye off the ball of the more long-standing ideological threats."State of Terror continues on Monday on BBC Radio 4 and BBC Sounds.
Daily Mail
36 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Fury as secret identities of SAS troops are leaked online by army association magazine in fresh data blunder that could have put lives at risk
An urgent probe has been launched after the identities of SAS troops from one of its most senior regiments were published online. The fresh data blunder came last year when a Grenadier Guards' in-house publication included a rollcall of the names and deployments of its most senior officers. Ten men were listed next to the codename MAB - which is shorthand for MoD A block - the site of the UK special forces headquarters, The Sunday Times has reported. The codename has been widely publicised online - in turn allowing any terrorist group or enemy state to work out that the troops were part of the SAS. The document containing the information about the soldiers' identities was produced by the Grenadier Guards Regimental Association. The group is a charitable association made up of former service members - with such organisations routinely handed information about active army personnel. Defence secretary John Healey is understood to be furious at the data breach which comes just days after the Afghan superinjunction was exposed. Head of the army General Sir Roly Walker has ordered an investigation into why the details of the SAS soldiers were so widely available. He said according to The Sunday Times: 'The security of our people is of the utmost importance and we take any breach extremely seriously.' 'As a result of this incident, I have directed an immediate review into our data-sharing arrangements with our regimental and corps associations to ensure appropriate guidance and safeguards are in place to best support the vital work they do,' he added. Meanwhile, SAS legend Chris Ryan was also concerned at the leak, and told MailOnline last night: 'There are serious questions to be answered here. 'Why is this data readily available and to who? 'This is an information management issue. Malicious or accidental insider, a breach has consequences. 'What classification is the in-house magazine and who signed it off? 'When these breaches happen, there's needs to be accountability or they will keep happening.' The former military hardman-turned acclaimed author added: 'This is a "MABulous" blunder by the Guards - that's why they have their own squadron.' It comes after the Mail revealed earlier this week that special forces, MI6 spies and government officials were among more than 100 Britons on the lost Afghan dataset. It emerged that a secret operation smuggling migrants to Britain was being run by ministers after a military blunder put 100,000 'at risk of death' from the Taliban. Ministers fought for two years to hush-up the data blunder with an unprecedented super-injunction that silenced this newspaper and other media. The High Court was told the draconian gagging order was necessary to protect 100,000 Afghans the UK had put 'at risk of death'. But after we were able to get access to the database and analyse it, it became clear that dozens of senior British military officers including a brigadier and government officials were also exposed. The Mail's investigation triggered a massive secrecy row yesterday as security-cleared parliamentarians erupted in fury at being kept in the dark. Lord Beamish, chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, said: 'I am astounded at this. 'The idea that members of MI6 are on this get quarterly reports from the security agencies and we have heard nothing at all. Why?' The MOD said: 'It's longstanding policy of successive governments to not comment on Special Forces. 'We take the security of our personnel very seriously and personnel, particularly those in sensitive positions, always have appropriate measures in place to protect their security.' A spokesman added: 'The government strongly welcomes the Intelligence and Security Committee's scrutiny of the Afghan data incident. 'Defence Intelligence and the wider department have been instructed by the Defence Secretary to give their full support to the ISC and all parliamentary committees. 'If ministers and officials are asked to account and give evidence, they will. 'We have restored proper parliamentary accountability and scrutiny for the decisions that the department takes and the spending that we commit on behalf of the taxpayer.'
