Mel Stride: Reform is not offering the public a realistic economic deal
' There is a deep, dangerous fiscal irresponsibility at the heart of the offer that Reform has'
On the latest Planet Normal podcast, which you can listen to using the audio player below, columnists Liam Halligan and Allison Pearson speak to Mel Stride, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, who warns of growing economic threats from both the Left and the populist Right.
Speaking ahead of his speech today, Mr Stride outlines where he sees the fiscal threat from Reform and why he doesn't believe they will be effective. 'It appears that they are whatever kind of party they think will appeal to what people want to hear in different parts of the country and across the political spectrum. This is a party that, on the one hand, likes to talk about lowering taxes, and on the other hand wants to increase welfare spending, with the abolition of the two child benefit cap.'
'These tax cuts are there right across the board and where they can apparently find the money very quickly, but none of it is realistic.'
In regards to Labour, Mr Stride lays out where he believes they have caused economic damage; ' The reality is this government's economic policy, which has included putting up National Insurance on employers, that cost has been passed on by way of higher prices has also fuelled inflation.
'It has also had a devastating consequence on the servicing costs of our national debt. We are now spending, on servicing costs on our national debt alone, about a hundred billion pounds, which is twice what we spend on defence. Those kinds of levels of spending and pressure on the public finances can be laid very squarely at the door of Rachel Reeves.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
If white British people become a minority, the Left will be in serious trouble
Within the next 40 years, white British people will become a minority in this country. And by the year 2100, they'll account for only a third of the population. So predicted Professor Matt Goodwin of Buckingham University in a report this week. And, ever since, I've been pondering an intriguing question. If his prediction comes to pass, will the Left still support DEI? After all, the whole point of DEI – the progressive doctrine of 'diversity, equity and inclusion' – is to benefit minorities. So, if white British people become a minority, will Left-wing activists throw all their righteous energies into championing them? Perhaps they'll insist that job adverts give priority to applicants who are white British. And order schools to celebrate White British History Month. And, when political parties are seeking election candidates, demand that they increase white British representation by adopting all-white British shortlists. Equally, perhaps they'll call on the BBC to cast white British actors in non-white British roles. And argue that all non-white workers should undergo unconscious bias training, to check that they aren't harbouring prejudice against the white British community – or, as they're properly known, People of No Colour. I suppose it's possible. But, for some reason, I have a funny feeling they'll decide there's no longer any need for DEI – because, once the white British are a small minority, true social justice will finally have been achieved. In 2016, the late Canadian comedian Norm MacDonald told the greatest satirical joke of our age. It went like this. 'What terrifies me is if Isis were to donate a nuclear device and kill 50 million Americans. Imagine the backlash against peaceful Muslims?' A perfect skewering of 21st-century liberal priorities. I'm reminded of it often. For example, whenever there's a debate in the Commons or on the BBC about the grooming gangs scandal – and the talk, as always, turns swiftly to the dangers of Islamophobia. This week, I was reminded of that sublimely dark joke once again. And it was thanks to a truly mind-boggling article in the newspaper USA Today. Last Sunday, in the Colorado city of Boulder, a firebombing attack was launched on a group of Jewish people who had gathered to raise awareness of Israeli hostages in Gaza. Following the arrest, at the scene, of a 45-year-old Egyptian migrant who allegedly told police he wanted to 'kill all Zionist people', immigration officials began taking steps to deport his family, who are also Egyptian migrants. And how did USA Today choose to cover this development? By publishing a piece with the tear-jerking headline, 'Boulder Suspect's Daughter Dreamed of Studying Medicine. Now She Faces Deportation.' Beneath this headline we were informed that 18-year-old Habiba had recently won a 'Best and Brightest scholarship', and 'written about her hope of accomplishing great things'. Well, I suppose it's only natural that a newspaper would wish to focus on Habiba's plight. Because of course she's the real victim here. After a backlash from thousands of staggered readers, USA Today revised the article on its website, to give at least a little more prominence to the firebombing attack and the members of the public who were seriously injured in it – including an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor. Anyway, I hope that the newspaper's journalists aren't feeling too sad about the crushing of Habiba's dreams. Because I've got some wonderful news for them. Incredible though it may sound, the US isn't the only country on Earth where it's possible to study medicine. In fact, it can even be studied in Egypt. So there's really no need for Habiba to miss out. And if she doesn't fancy Egypt, there's an exciting alternative. She and her family can simply come and live in Britain. Here, after all, they can rest safe in the knowledge that we never deport anyone. More and more MPs, reports the BBC, are deciding against the legalisation of assisted suicide – or, to use the term preferred by its supporters, 'assisted dying'. These MPs say they supported the idea in principle, but now reluctantly concede that the bill lacks adequate safeguards. Good on them. But I hope that the many MPs who still support the bill will consider another crucial argument against. Which is that, if they legalise assisted suicide, the criteria for eligibility will inevitably widen, as it has in other Western countries. And so, in due course, we could end up like the Netherlands – where, last year, a woman in her 20s was granted an assisted suicide. She wasn't terminally ill. In fact, she wasn't physically ill at all. She was just depressed. It's chilling that the state would agree to such a request. But that's the sort of scenario we could easily see here. It'll be like a dystopian inversion of the Samaritans. If you tell the Samaritans that you're so depressed you want to die, its staff will do everything they can to dissuade you. But if you tell the state that you're so depressed you want to die, it'll say: 'Certainly, we'll book you straight in. Can you do Tuesday, 10 past three?' 'Way of the World' is a twice-weekly satirical look at the headlines while aiming to mock the absurdities of the modern world. It is published at 6am every Tuesday and Saturday Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Dutch Far-Right Leader's Bid for More Power Risks Flopping
Geert Wilders is betting that triggering the collapse of an unloved Dutch government will position him to emerge stronger and become the nation's dominant political figure, but signs are emerging that the far-right leader's gambit could backfire. By alienating potential coalition partners and testing the patience of weary voters, Wilders is losing support compared to the last election and his Freedom Party's lead over the GreenLeft–Labour alliance has narrowed.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hegseth says Nato allies ‘very close' to raising defence spending target to 5%
The US defence secretary, Pete Hegseth, said Nato allies were 'very close, almost near consensus' to an agreement to significantly raise targets for defence spending to 5% of GDP in the next decade. The Trump administration official indicated he expected the increased target to be agreed at a summit in The Hague later this month – and confirmed that the headline figure was to be split into two parts. 'This alliance, in a matter of weeks, will be committing to 5%: 3.5% in hard military and 1.5% in infrastructure and defence-related activities. That combination constitutes a real commitment,' he said. Hegseth was speaking at a press conference at Nato headquarters in Brussels after the morning session of an all-day meeting of defence ministers from the 32-country transatlantic military alliance. 'I'm very encouraged by what we heard in there,' Hegseth told reporters. 'Countries in there are well exceeding 2% and we think very close, almost near consensus, on a 5% commitment to Nato.' Nato's current target level for military spending, agreed at a summit in Cardiff in 2014, is 2% of GDP, but Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed that European allies and Canada do not spend enough compared with the US. In an attempt to avoid Trump wrecking the first Nato summit of his second term, the alliance's new secretary general, Mark Rutte, proposed a 3.5% plus 1.5% target, though there is some ambiguity about the target date. Initial reports suggested that Rutte wanted allies to hit the target from 2032, though earlier this week British sources suggested the date could be 2035. Sweden's defence minister said he would like to see the target hit by 2030. Only Poland currently exceeds the 3.5% target for hard military spending at 4.32%, according to Nato figures, while the US defence budget, the largest in the alliance, amounts to 3.4% of GDP, at $967bn (£711bn). The UK spends 2.33% of GDP on its military, but has pledged to increase that to 2.5% by 2027 and to 3% some time in the next parliament. Earlier this week the prime minister, Keir Starmer, declined to set a firm date for the UK achieving 3% as he unveiled a strategic defence review. Related: Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls | Martin Kettle Rutte will visit London on Monday to meet Starmer before the summit. Downing Street said the prime minister and the secretary general would 'talk about how we ensure all allies step up their defence spending now in order to respond to the threats that we face now'. Germany's defence minister, Boris Pistorius, said Berlin would need up to 60,000 additional troops to meet new Nato targets for weapons and personnel. 'We are stepping up to our responsibility as Europe's largest economy,' the minister said on Thursday. Germany, which currently spends 2.12% of GDP on defence, had been singled out by Trump as a laggard in spending, though until Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Berlin had been reluctant to be a leader in European military spending, partly due to the memories of the militarism of the second world war.
