PM sidesteps future of two-child benefit cap amid ‘chaos, chaos, chaos' claims
The Prime Minister said he is 'absolutely determined' to 'drive down' child poverty, although he declined to give further details ahead of the publication of the Government's strategy on the issue.
His remarks came as Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch pressed Sir Keir to say how many pensioners would have their winter fuel payments restored and asked about the future of the two-child benefit cap amid 'U-turn after U-turn' from the Prime Minister.
The cap was introduced in 2015 by then-Conservative chancellor George Osborne and restricts child welfare payments to the first two children born to most families.
Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions, Mrs Badenoch said Sir Keir has 'not stabilised the economy' before adding: 'He has no clear answers on what he's doing, it's just chaos, chaos, chaos. He's making announcements with no detail.
'So let's move to another area of confusion. Can we get a simple answer: will the Government keep the two-child benefit cap?'
Sir Keir replied: 'I am absolutely determined that we will drive down child poverty, that's one of the proudest things of the last Labour government, that's why we've got a taskforce, that's why we've got a strategy, and we'll set out that strategy in due course.
'But we drive child poverty down. Under them, poverty always goes up.'
Mrs Badenoch countered: 'I didn't ask him about a taskforce, I asked him if he'll keep the two-child benefit cap, and he doesn't know.
'It's just chaos and uncertainty. He has no details, he is briefing something and causing a lot of confusion to the people out there.
'But on that two-child benefit cap I'll tell him this: I believe in family, but I also believe in fairness. On this side of the House, we believe that people on benefits should have to make the same choices on having children as everyone else.
'What does the Prime Minister believe?'
Sir Keir replied: 'I believe profoundly in driving down poverty and child poverty, that's why we'll put a strategy in place.'
The Prime Minister then noted Mrs Badenoch has been 'praised this week by the Russian embassy', adding: 'If she carries on echoing Kremlin talking points like this, Reform is going to be sending her an application form for membership.'
Mrs Badenoch said she asked Sir Keir what he believes in, adding: 'He had to look in his folder to find the answer. His MPs behind him know what they believe in, he doesn't know.'
The Tory leader went on to claim 'it's only going to get harder' for Sir Keir in Government, adding: 'He has to ask (Downing Street chief of staff) Morgan McSweeney what it is that he believes in, but the fact is the chaos is being felt in the economy.'
Mrs Badenoch said Chancellor Rachel Reeves claims she 'would not be coming back with new tax rises but she will have to pay for all of these U-turns' announced by the Prime Minister.
Sir Keir opted to read out Mrs Badenoch's suggestion that Ukraine is fighting a 'proxy war' on behalf of western Europe against Russia.
He said: 'That was certainly noticed in the Russian embassy because they put out a statement saying the Leader of the Opposition has 'finally called a spade a spade, Ukraine is indeed fighting a proxy war against Russia on behalf of Western interests'.
'They went on to say: 'The illegitimate Kiev regime, created, financed and armed by the West, has been at it since 2014.''
Sir Keir added: 'She asked me what I believe in; I believe in standing by Ukraine and calling out Russia as the aggressor.'
Mrs Badenoch's spokesman later told reporters that 'for the Prime Minister to read out tweets written in the Kremlin as some sort of political 'gotcha' is quite despicable and we are calling on him to apologise'.
Mrs Badenoch defended the Conservative Party's record in government in supporting Ukraine, adding Sir Keir 'doesn't have any answers' and is 'saying everything he can to distract from the mess he is making of our economy'.
She said: 'Two weeks ago he was crowing about his historic trade deal and how he got 0% tariffs on steel, now the steel industry will face 25% tariffs unless he does exactly what President Trump tells him to.
'It's chaos, chaos, chaos, and isn't the root of the chaos that it is about this Prime Minister, his decisions and his judgment?'
Sir Keir replied: 'She gets up on a Wednesday morning, scrolls through social media, never does any of the detail.
'We're the only country in the world that isn't paying the 50% tax on steel and that will be coming down, we're working on it to bring it down to zero, that is going to happen.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
44 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Questions over council spending on Friars Walk Newport
The local authority negotiated a deal with the owners of Friars Walk in 2017 that would top up income if the centre was not collecting enough rent. Payments in each of the past six financial years have reached the maximum £500,000 – new figures seen by the Local Democracy Reporting Service show. Cllr Matthew Evans, the leader of the Conservative opposition group, said he was 'absolutely staggered that the council has squandered over £3.56 million of local taxpayers' money on this'. A council spokesperson defended the deal and said the local authority would still benefit overall from the deal, even if the maximum £500,000 was paid out annually over the course of the 15-year deal. The council received £8 million when it signed the deal, and would be liable to pay a maximum of £7.5 million in top-ups, they explained. 'It is important to note that as well as the rental subsidy, the arrangement ensures that the council receives additional rent payments if the centre's profits exceed certain thresholds,' the spokesperson added. But Cllr Evans said the deal to top up low rents involved money which could be better spent on council services. 'Think how many additional social service staff could have been employed, or potholes fixed,' he said. 'I seem to recall when I questioned the decision taken by the cabinet at the time, I was told that it was merely 'an insurance policy' which would never be called on. 'Sadly the public have been picking up the tab for Labour's failure to regenerate the city centre. The reopening of the former Debenhams site is good news, but more needs to be done and fast.' A homeware store is reportedly set to open in part of the former Debenhams premises, which was described as the anchor tenant for the Friars Walk centre. Debenhams' high-street operations ceased in 2021 and the future of the large Newport site has been uncertain until the recent news of an incoming tenant. Michael Enea, a Conservative Party campaigner and political blogger, has urged the council to consider what he called 'huge' business rate charges for larger premises in the city centre. 'The former Debenhams site at £345,000 a year, the old Cineworld complex is £64,500 a year – these are astronomical figures,' he said. 'No wonder vast swathes of businesses have moved to out-of-town retail parks. We need a total review of business rates in Wales whereby it becomes an incentive to trade in our town and city centres. Something has to change.' The local authority spokesperson said Newport City Council is not responsible for setting business rates. 'We do, however, offer support for small and medium-sized city centre businesses through our local city centre rate relief scheme, which offers a discount of 25% on non-domestic rates for qualifying properties,' they explained. 'Very small businesses already receive rate relief through the Welsh Government's small business rate relief scheme. 'The Welsh Government also offers support for larger businesses through its retail, leisure and hospitality relief scheme, which offers a discount of 40 per cent on non- domestic rates, capped at £110,000 per business.'
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Immigration warning over 'less than welcoming' statements
The tone of Sir Keir's remarks on May 12 was, as observed by Mr Sheerin and many others, surely something of a surprise. And it was unexpected even with an awareness - having covered this key issue closely over months and years - of Labour's developing and lamentable stance on immigration. The Prime Minister declared: 'Nations depend on rules – fair rules. Sometimes they're written down, often they're not, but either way, they give shape to our values. They guide us towards our rights, of course, but also our responsibilities, the obligations we owe to one another. Now, in a diverse nation like ours, and I celebrate that, these rules become even more important. Without them, we risk becoming an island of strangers, not a nation that walks forward together.' The 'island of strangers' was a striking turn of phrase. Sir Keir went on: 'So when you have an immigration system that seems almost designed to permit abuse, that encourages some businesses to bring in lower-paid workers rather than invest in our young people, or simply one that is sold by politicians to the British people on an entirely false premise, then you're not championing growth, you're not championing justice, or however else people defend the status quo. You're actually contributing to the forces that are slowly pulling our country apart.' Maybe with the benefit of hindsight the Prime Minister's remarks, even though they could have been uttered just as easily by the Tory Brexiters, should not have been quite so much of a shock as they were. After all, Labour has embraced the key elements of the Conservatives' hard Brexit: loss of free movement of people between the UK and European Economic Area nations and the ending of the frictionless trade from which the country previously benefited enormously when it was part of the single market. Nevertheless, Sir Keir's tone was surely surprisingly dismal, even given all of this. Not only did we have the reference to 'an island of strangers' but also this declaration: 'This strategy will finally take back control of our borders and close the book on a squalid chapter for our politics, our economy, and our country.' What seemed clear from Sir Keir's utterings was that populism most certainly did not end with the exit of Boris Johnson or Rishi Sunak from the prime minister post. Sir Keir's tone contrasted so starkly with Mr Sheerin's reasoned appraisal of the Prime Minister's remarks and Labour's plans on immigration. We had this from Sir Keir: 'We do have to ask why parts of our economy seem almost addicted to importing cheap labour rather than investing in the skills of people who are here and want a good job in their community. Sectors like engineering, where visas have rocketed while apprenticeships have plummeted.' You would imagine Mr Sheerin, as a veteran of the engineering sector, knows a lot more about the specifics than Sir Keir. And it is worth observing the Scottish Engineering chief executive is passionate about people in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK being trained as engineers. He would love to see the skills shortages which are posing such a challenge to member companies of Scottish Engineering and others in the sector solved. Mr Sheerin is not a politician - just someone with deep knowledge of the Scottish engineering sector. So what did the Scottish Engineering chief have to say in his quarterly report published on Friday? Read more He declared that he found the UK Government's 'latest pronouncements on immigration disappointing', highlighting the detrimental impact on companies of 'statements that feel less than welcoming'. Mr Sheerin hammered home his view that raising minimum qualification levels from Higher equivalents to degree level would 'leave out the skilled trades and crafts roles where we are already in shortest supply: welders, fabricators, electricians, pipefitters, CNC (computer numerical control) machinists to name a few'. That is surely a crucial point. And it is worth emphasising Mr Sheerin's observation that people skilled in these roles are 'already in shortest supply'. Mr Sheerin also noted: 'The shortening of the graduate visa scheme reducing the right to work from two years to 18 months after graduating will not only hit our education sector but also reduce the attractiveness of the scheme for companies who will have a shorter timeline to decide whether to invest in the process to extend the visa of the employee.' This is another good point. And the Scottish Engineering chief executive declared: 'Whilst I recognise that this [immigration] is a contentious political issue across the UK for a whole range of reasons, in engineering and manufacturing in Scotland the reality is that immigration is a vital source of skills and experience that cannot be replaced overnight. These skills levels take years to build - and we should be building them - but closing off the supply before putting in place the actions to do that is another example of an action that will challenge the stated ambition of growing our economy.' The time horizon with regard to building skills levels is important. It might not chime with that of politicians such as Sir Keir, who seems at pains to bang the drum on immigration as Nigel Farage's Reform UK makes a big noise on this front. However, it is a simple factual point that engineering skills do take years to build. Mr Sheerin declared that a frustration for him in Labour's immigration pronouncements was that 'whereas there is considerable detail on how we plan to restrict and close this supply of skills, on the laudable stated aim that we will replace the loss with trained or upskilled UK-born workers, the detail is missing on how that will be achieved'. He added: 'And there is no detail that recognises that engineering skills take between four and six years to get to a starting level of competency. It does not seem an unreasonable request for the get-well plan to carry at least the same level of detail as the take-it-away plan.' This seems like an absolutely fair summation of the problems with Labour's populist immigration proposals. If you were asked to choose whether you think it is Sir Keir or Mr Sheerin who is on the money in relation to immigration policy and its effect on engineering and the broader economy, it would surely be the easiest of questions to answer, any day of the week.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Jim Sillars: John Swinney should resign as SNP leader
Polling suggested the SNP would win the crunch by-election but instead Labour took the seat pushing the SNP into second while Reform was placed third. The result prompted calls on Friday by SNP veteran Alex Neil for Mr Swinney's resignation as leader before the Scottish Parliament elections in 2026, when the SNP will have been in power for 19 years. Speaking to The Herald Mr Sillars echoed Mr Neil's views that Mr Swinney should quit though added he did not think a change of leadership would be sufficient to put the SNP on the front foot in time for the election next May saying better delivery on public services and a review of policy priorities was needed. "Look at yesterday's result," he said. READ MORE: SNP veteran calls for Swinney to quit after Labour shock by-election victory Sarwar: Swinney ran a 'disgraceful' campaign and is running down the clock as FM Rows with press, claims of racism and misinformation - a by-election that turned ugly "The SNP went down to 29%. If that was repeated in 2026 the SNP will have a disaster on their hands, they would get nowhere near the seats they need to get and therefore not be in government. "It is very difficult to see how they can reverse their position. They are also being judged by voters on the basis of their performance in government. "They have spent more time in Holyrood arguing about the identity of women than they have about the 85,000 children living in abject poverty. Former SNP deputy leader Jim Sillars (Image: PA) "It is not just a leadership replacement they would have to rethink their whole policy priorities. They have lost the people." He noted the difference in support for independence and for the SNP. "When you get polling showing that support for independence is around 50% but the so-called party of independence is getting 29% of the vote in a critical by-election then there is a real problem," he added. "I never thought John Swinney would make a good leader. I think he should go on the basis that he is a failure, though it doesn't mean that him going would really change things substantially." Along with Mr Neil, Mr Sillars is a longstanding critic of Mr Swinney and former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. Both were supportive of the late former First Minister Alex Salmond when he fell out with Ms Sturgeon. Turning to the First Minister's message that the by-election was a straight contest between the SNP and Reform, Mr Sillars said: "He punted Reform instead of dealing with the real opposition which was Labour. Scottish Labour's victory rally in Hamilton on Friday (Image: Colin Mearns) "It showed a man with a lack of judgment and someone who could not read the street." Former SNP health secretary Mr Neil was the first senior party figure to call for a change of leadership following the SNP by-election defeat. In a post on X on Friday Alex Neil, who held Cabinet roles in the administrations of both Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon, said it was time for a new leadership. READ MORE: Keir Starmer: John Swinney hasn't raised independence referendum with me Swinney defends claims Labour 'out of it' in by-election Not a shot that's been fired across SNP's bows, it's a cruise missile "Poor by election result for the SNP despite having the best candidate," wrote the former Cabinet minister on X. "It shows that the opinion polls appear wide of the mark. Most importantly it shows the current SNP leadership needs to be replaced urgently." Mr Sarwar and his party celebrated in the early hours of Friday morning after Labour's Davy Russell was elected as the new MSP for Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse, winning the seat from the SNP. With the votes showing a swing of more than 7% from the SNP to Labour, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said on Friday the result showed people have "voted for change". The by-election had been held following the death earlier this year of Scottish Government minister Christina McKelvie. When the votes were counted, Mr Russell polled 8,559, SNP candidate Katy Loudon took 7,957 votes, while Reform's Ross Lambie secured 7,088. And although Mr Russell was elected with fewer votes than Labour secured in the seat in the 2021 Scottish Parliament election, the SNP's support fell from just over 46% of all ballots then to 29.35% in the by-election. Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice insisting they were "delighted" with coming third - despite speculation prior to the count that they could come in second or may even pull off a surprise victory. Speaking at a media event in Hamilton on Friday morning, Mr Sarwar accused the SNP leader of running a "disgraceful" campaign" and insisted the by-election could "help lead the way" to him becoming Scotland's next First Minister. Mr Swinney said the SNP was "clearly disappointed" with the result. The First Minister and party leader said Labour had "won by an absolute landslide" in Rutherglen and Hamilton West - noting the SNP "came much closer" this time round. But he added: "The people of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse have made clear that we still have work to do. "Over the next few days, we will take time to consider the result fully." The SNP was approached to seek comment on the interventions from Mr Sillars and Mr Neil. Since coming into office in Spring last year Mr Swinney has attempted to refresh the SNP's policy agenda with a renewed focus on addressing child poverty and improving public services, in particular tackling waits for NHS treatment. He has attempted to steer away from the public debate on gender politics which dominated the end of Ms Sturgeon's time in office.
