UK Pushes Planning Bill to Unblock Infrastructure Projects
The UK's Labour government will introduce long-promised legislation on Tuesday to speed up planning decisions as ministers seek to help stimulate growth through a step-change in housebuilding and by unblocking infrastructure projects from roads to wind farms.
The Planning and Infrastructure Bill includes financial rewards worth £2,500 ($3,200) over 10 years for those living within 500 meters (1,600 feet) of new pylons, priority access to grid connections for clean energy projects and a faster approvals regime for infrastructure projects deemed to be of national significance, according to an emailed statement late on Monday from the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
My sympathies, Rachel Reeves. Cutting public spending isn't easy
This week's Spending Review will expose the obvious predicament of the Government: there is no money. While Labour will continue to blame the Conservatives, it is responsible for most of what has happened in the past year. Decisions it has made have exacerbated the problem. Right from the beginning of its administration, the Labour Government was strangely committed to increased public train drivers, less than eight weeks after the election, received a 'no strings attached' offer of 15 per cent over three years. Within 48 hours of the deal being broadcast to the world, Aslef announced a fresh campaign of strikes. In addition to the generosity shown to the train drivers, about 1.3 million NHS workers – including nurses and paramedics – and around 500,000 teachers got a pay rise of 5.5 per cent. Junior doctors, who had staged a series of strikes over pay since early 2023, struck a deal which showed an average 22.3 per cent pay rise over two years. You can argue that all this was necessary, but the announcement of these sweetheart deals, after only weeks in government, looked too much like a bargain that had been struck before the election itself. To pay for this largesse, the Labour Government proceeded to revert to a tax policy that many commentators have described as, frankly, Marxist. Marx divided society into three groups, namely landowners, capitalists and workers. The Labour Party pledged not to increase taxes on workers. It raised taxes on employers and farmers instead. It increased national insurance for employees on the former and inheritance taxes on the latter. It didn't realise that putting taxes on employers would harm workers. This point was made by none other than the Office for Budget Responsibility, which said that 65 per cent of the £25 billion raid on business would be paid by workers, in the form of higher prices for goods and lower wages. Removing the winter fuel payment from pensioners only made sense to Treasury officials. Yes, it saved approximately £10 billion. But for a Labour Government that vaunted its social-democratic 'values', the policy was a disaster. It went against the core message of the Labour Party – that it was 'caring' and benevolent, even when money was tight. This policy has been reversed. People think politicians embark on U-turns to regain support. This is naive. Politicians know that the damage has been done; the U-turn merely prevents further loss of support. There have been swerves, U-turns and missteps. The backlash from Labour MPs against any suggestion to reduce the welfare bill or reform the system suggests that Reeves will not be able to reduce public expenditure, as she would like. In addition, it is obvious that more money will have to be found for defence. There is an expectation, particularly after President Trump's equivocal statements about US support for Nato, that Labour will have to increase defence spending. The Prime Minister himself has said that he would commit his Government to spending 2.5 per cent of GDP by April 2027. Where will this money come from, if no attempt can be made to constrain welfare spending? Higher taxes, of course. Yet the problem here is that tax levels are already very high. VAT is at 20 per cent; the top rate of tax is at 45 per cent and kicks in at £125,000. Changes to the non-dom regime have resulted in wealthy people leaving the country, and the so-called 'Energy Profits Levy' is now proving to be a major disincentive to invest in the North Sea. A lot of this foolishness can of course be attributed to the last government, of which I was a senior member. The Conservatives, remarkably, introduced the Energy Profits Levy. We changed the non-dom regime – influenced by the Civil Service, I were always told that we had to spend more money. Of course, to our social-democratic establishment, spending more money meant more tax revenues, not by growing the economy and increasing wealth, but by imposing ever higher tax rates. The logic of this cycle will result in new taxes, as there is only so much 'ketchup' you can squeeze out of the existing 'bottles', so to speak. Capital taxes, a mansion tax and increases in capital gains tax will surely be on the menu presented to the Chancellor if, as is likely, growth rates are revised downwards in the autumn. The fiscal situation cannot be understood simply as a result of the past few years. All governments in the Western world have faced increased public expenditure without a commensurate increase in growth rates or national wealth. All Western governments are saddled with welfare payments, exacerbated by high levels of immigration. All except the United States have experienced anaemic growth rates since the financial crisis of 2008. Yet, in the UK, it has been Labour that has been buffeted around more than most other governments, by giving in to spending demands. Much like an overweight man trying – and then promptly giving up – his umpteenth diet, the Government seems to have simply stopped bothering to reduce public expenditure. In this way, the tail of welfare spending starts to wag the dog. The productive economy – indeed all the nation's economic activity – begins to be seen as merely an appendage of the welfare state. It is as though the only justification of economic activity and wealth creation is to pay for ever-increasing welfare spending. This cannot be the right way to run an economy. In fact, for most of British history, entrepreneurialism and innovation have been driven by the private sector. That is what made the UK prosperous. Today, under this Labour Government, public spending will crowd out the private sector. Higher taxes are already stifling productive enterprise. Wealthy people are leaving the country, while our borders seem out of control. The sadness is that this Government has reached this position after less than a year. Who can tell what another four years of the same policies will bring? Higher taxes, higher immigration and flatlining growth seem the most likely outcome. If this happens, the Government will simply be turfed out, like the last government, much to everybody's relief. 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.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Labour backbenchers have called for a Government U-turn on planned disability benefit cuts, after Chancellor Rachel Reeves restored winter fuel payments to a majority of pensioners. Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
North East MPs react to Rachel Reeves' winter fuel payment announcement
North East MPs have welcomed the news nine million pensioners will receive a winter fuel payout again this year. The Chancellor announced a £1.25bn U-turn today (Monday, June 9) which will see the payment worth up to £300 restored for the vast majority of pensioners. It will mean all OAPs with an income of under £35,000 will automatically receive the amount, after the payment was initially scrapped last year for all but the worst-off pensioners. Confirming the U-turn, Rachel Reeves said the Government had 'listened to people's concerns' about the decision to limit the payment to the poorest pensioners last winter, and was now able to widen eligibility because Labour had restored 'stability' to the economy. Durham MP Mary Kelly Foy said: 'I'm delighted the Government has listened to the voices of those impacted by the loss of Winter Fuel Allowance, and to campaigners, charities and MPs who have been advocating for it be either be re-introduced, or for the cut off threshold to be extended to ensure more people are eligible. 'I made my opposition to these cuts clear at the time, and have continued to advocate for the Government to change course. It's good news more people will benefit from this payment this year, but the Government must ensure decisions made going forward protect vulnerable groups, rather than push them further into poverty. Ms Foy called for a U-turn on the Government's policy last year. Read next: Craig Yorke: Girls tell jury defendant had weapons in car before alleged murder Prosecco-launching booze thief who flung bottle at Tesco staff barred from Darlington Call for speed bumps on 'lethal' County Durham road after boy, 9, hit by car lick here to join our WhatsApp community and get breaking news updates direct to your phone. Luke Myer, MP for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland, said: 'This is a positive and long-overdue step to support older people through the winter. "I'm pleased the Treasury have listened to me and other MPs who expressed concern about the threshold. 'Raising the threshold will help pensioners across Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland to stay warm and well. But we also need to see faster action to bring down bills in the long term and end the unfair postcode lottery for fuel poverty in our region.'
