Tories call for information watchdog to probe Reform UK's data requests
The information watchdog should open an investigation into Reform UK, because of risks around data it has requested for its town hall cost-cutting drive, the Conservatives have said.
Nigel Farage's political party has requested a broad swathe of information from the councils it now controls across England, as it begins an initiative to drive down spending based on the USA's department of government efficiency, also known as 'Doge'.
But shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake warned that handing the data to Reform is a 'cyber-security disaster waiting to happen' as he wrote to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) calling for an investigation.
Data about the identities of whistleblowers, the names and addresses of people who receive meals on wheels, and the amount of cash foster carers receive could be part of the broad package Reform has requested, the Tories claimed.
The Tories also questioned who would be handling this data on behalf of Reform UK, which has said it will use a 'unit of software engineers, data analysts and forensic auditors' to analyse the information.
In his letter to the ICO seen by the PA news agency, Mr Hollinrake said: 'I believe that the scale of such unauthorised data transfers across local government is a cyber-security disaster waiting to happen.
'There is a strong public interest in the Information Commissioner taking pro-active steps to investigate and, if necessary, issue enforcement notices against the public authorities and Reform UK Ltd.
'I also suspect that council staff would welcome the support of the Information Commissioner, given the clear threats to sack them if they sound the alarm on breaches of the law. It is also not in the financial interests of local taxpayers for their council to be exposed to the liability of fines for breaching the law.'
Zia Yusuf, Reform's head of Doge, claimed the Conservatives 'were desperate to cover up the corruption and waste of their now deposed local government regimes'.
In a post on social media site X, he added: 'It will not work.
'Just as they plundered hundreds of millions from the British taxpayers during Covid they have done the same at councils.
'Reform councillors were voted in to expose it, and with the help of Reform's Doge team, they will do just that.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Don't make us work on Israel's ‘genocide' in Gaza, say civil servants
British civil servants must stop helping Israel with 'potential war crimes' in Gaza, union bosses have demanded. The Public and Commercial Services (PCS) union, which represents almost 200,000 civil servants across Whitehall, has advised members to 'stop all work within the civil service and its related areas which in any way potentially enables acts of genocide'. It has pledged to support civil servants who refuse to work on Israel and demanded that mandarins be given legal immunity for aiding potential 'war crimes'. Union chiefs want an urgent meeting with the Cabinet Office and have written to officials to 'seek assurances that members are protected from legal liability for any acts carried out by the state of Israel'. The move comes just days after about 300 Foreign Office officials were told to consider resigning after sending a letter to David Lammy, the Foreign Secretary, warning against 'complicity' in Israel's actions. The letter cited the killing by Israeli forces of 15 aid workers in March and the blockade on aid into Gaza as examples of concerns. Sir Olly Robbins and Nick Dyer, two of the most senior mandarins in the Foreign Office, suggested that the complainants step down if they disagreed with the Government's policy. The response was said to have been met with fury in Whitehall, with one insider telling the BBC that there was a 'deep sense of disappointment that the space for challenge is being further shut down'. In a letter sent on Friday to Cat Little, the Cabinet permanent secretary, the PCS union said the Government's response to the concerns raised this week by civil servants was 'dismissive and inadequate'. It argued that the Government 'may be putting UK civil servants at risk of liability for crimes committed by the Israeli state and placing them in a position of conflict given their obligations under the civil service code'. Fran Heathcote, the general secretary of the PCS, said the union was 'extremely concerned that the Government continues to ignore our members' concerns that they may be held liable under international law for the war crimes being committed daily by the state of Israel'. Ministers' official line is that Israel is 'at risk' of breaching international law with its actions in Gaza, with 30 out of about 350 arms sales licences to Israel halted in September out of fear that the weapons may be used for war crimes. However, union bosses called on the Government to go further. Ms Heathcote said: 'Given the scale of the death toll and the depth of the destruction to Palestinian society in Gaza, this matter is urgent and government officials need to act quickly.' She argued that it was 'time for the UK Government to wake up and listen to its own workers'. Foreign Office bosses are said to back a 'healthy challenge' to policy, but have argued that it is up to civil servants to deliver the will of the Government. The PCS union has pledged to 'fully back any member facing any sort of disciplinary action for refusing to action or work on any arms export license to Israel'. A Foreign Office spokesman said this week that 'since day one, this Government has rigorously applied international law in relation to the war in Gaza' adding that it is 'the job of civil servants to deliver on the policies of the government of the day and to provide professional, impartial advice'. The Cabinet Office has been approached for comment. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Farage's Reform will ‘let the SNP in', Badenoch warns
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has warned Scots that Nigel Farage's Reform will 'let the SNP in'. She said 'Scottish people deserve better' than another five years of John Swinney's party in power at Holyrood. Hitting out at Reform – which claimed on Friday to now have 11,000 members in Scotland – she said for Mr Farage's party, the union between Scotland and England is 'just not that important'. In contrast, Mrs Badenoch stressed the Conservatives will 'always be proud' of the union. 'Our party will always be ready to protect Scotland's place in the United Kingdom,' she added. She claimed for Labour and Sir Keir Starmer, belief in the union is 'negotiable', like 'every so-called promise' the Prime Minister makes. Speaking at the Scottish Conservative Party conference in Edinburgh on Friday, Mrs Badenoch said: 'We know that when it really matters, like on gender or free speech or taxes, Labour will fold and vote with the SNP.' She went on to say: 'In April this year, Nigel Farage said he would be fine with the SNP winning another five years in power. 'He's fine with another five years of higher bills, longer waiting lists, declining school standards, gender madness, and ultimately, independence.' Addressing her first Scottish conference since taking on the top job, Mrs Badenoch claimed: 'Reform will vote to let the SNP in, Conservatives will only ever vote to get the nationalists out.' Her speech came just over a week after a Holyrood by-election in which the Tories came fourth, well behind Reform in third. Meanwhile an opinion poll has suggested Mr Farage's party could come second in next May's Holyrood election. In that ballot, Mrs Badenoch said Scottish Tory leader Russell Findlay will 'put forward a different way of doing things to the SNP and Labour'. She promised the Tories will fight the election on a platform of 'positive new policies to fire up economic growth, create opportunities for workers and businesses, reward aspiration with lower taxes, and improve school standards'. Mrs Badenoch told the conference: 'Under my leadership, and with Russell Findlay in charge in Scotland, my party knows where it stands. 'With your help, we will renew Conservative policies with common sense.' She accepted in her speech the Tories in power at Westminster 'didn't always get things right'. But Mrs Badenoch insisted her election, coupled with Mr Findlay taking over to head the Scottish party last year, mean they are 'under new leadership'. She told supporters the Tories will 'once again represent everyone across Scotland and the United Kingdom who believes the same things that we do'. Adding that she is 'renewing this party', she declared: 'This speech isn't about looking back. It's about the future. Our future.' 🗣️ @KemiBadenoch: "The Conservative & Unionist Party is ready to fight for a common-sense future for Scotland and an even stronger United Kingdom."#SCC25 — Scottish Conservatives (@ScotTories) June 13, 2025 Part of that 'positive vision of the future' includes 'standing up' for the North Sea oil and gas industry, with Mrs Badenoch claiming that by increasing the energy profits levy – also known as the windfall tax – the Tories had introduced, Labour is 'killing the oil and gas industry'. Speaking about the levy, she said: 'Frankly if it is allowed to remain in place until 2030, as is Labour's current plan, there will be no industry left to tax. 'Thousands will have been made unemployed and all the while we import more gas from overseas – from the very same basin in which we are banned from drilling.' She called on the UK Government to remove the energy profits levy, as she added that the Tories would also 'scrap the ban on new licences' for oil and gas developments that has been imposed since Labour came to power. 'We will champion our own industry,' Mrs Badenoch told supporters. 'We will let this great British, great Scottish industry thrive, grow and create jobs – ensuring our energy security for generations to come and making Scotland richer in the process.' She also pledged the Tories will spend more on defence, saying this is crucial as 'our world becomes even more dangerous'. Citing conflict in the Middle East as well as in Ukraine, Mrs Badenoch said it 'becomes even harder to understand why Labour didn't use the spending review this week to set out a clear plan to get to 3% on defence spending'. The Tories, she insisted, will 'stand by Scotland's defence industry to build the security equipment and systems that keep us safe'.
Atlantic
an hour ago
- Atlantic
Aging in America Is About to Get Worse
At the core of every joke about Baby Boomers lies a seed of jealousy. Unlike younger generations, they have largely been able to walk a straightforward path toward prosperity, security, and power. They were born in an era of unprecedented economic growth and stability. College was affordable, and they graduated in a thriving job market. They were the first generation to reap the full benefits of a golden age of medical innovations: birth control, robotic surgery, the mapping of the human genome, effective cancer treatments, Ozempic. But recent policy changes are poised to make life significantly harder for Baby Boomers. 'If you're in your 60s or 70s, what the Trump administration has done means more insecurity for your assets in your 401(k), more insecurity about sources of long-term care, and, for the first time, insecurity about your Social Security benefits,' Teresa Ghilarducci, a labor economist at the New School, told me. 'It's a triple threat.' After more than half a century of aging into political and economic trends that worked to their benefit, the generation has become particularly vulnerable at exactly the wrong moment in history. Perhaps the biggest threat to Boomers in the second Trump administration is an overhaul of Social Security, which provides benefits to nearly nine out of 10 Americans ages 65 and older. In an emailed statement, Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano wrote, 'I am fully committed to upholding President Trump's promise to protect and strengthen Social Security. Beneficiaries can be confident that their benefits are secure.' But in February, DOGE announced plans to cut Social Security staff by about 12 percent and close six of its 10 regional offices; a quarter of the agency's IT staff has quit or been fired. Social Security's long-term outlook was already troubled before Trump, and these drastic reductions make the understaffed agency even less equipped to support those who rely on it. Shutting down field offices means seniors can't get help in person; less staffing means longer wait times when they call and more frequent website crashes. 'When you add hurdles, or cause a slowdown in terms of processing claims, you see losses in terms of benefits,' Monique Morrissey, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, told me. In fact, shutdowns of field offices during the first two years of the coronavirus pandemic corresponded with decreased enrollment in both Social Security and Social Security Disability Insurance, which is available to Americans under 65 who can no longer work for physical or mental reasons. Social Security cuts will most hurt low-income Boomers, who are the likeliest to rely on benefits to cover their whole cost of living. But even those with more financial assets may depend on Social Security as a safety net. 'It's important to understand that many seniors, even upper-income seniors, are just one shock away from falling into poverty,' says Nancy J. Altman, the president of Social Security Works, an organization that advocates for expanding the program. As a whole, seniors have more medical needs and less income than the general population, so they're much more financially vulnerable. If you're comfortably middle-class in your early 60s, at the height of your earning potential, that's no guarantee that you'll remain comfortably middle-class into your 70s. In the next few years, Boomers who face more medical bills as they stop working might find, for the first time in their life, that they can't easily afford them. Middle-income seniors are also likely to feel the impact of a volatile market. 'They tend to have modest investments and fixed incomes rather than equities, so the type of wealth that will erode over a high-inflation period,' Laura D. Quinby, who studies benefits and labor markets at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, told me. After Trump announced 10 percent tariffs on all imported goods in April, the three major stock indexes dropped 4 percent or more. They've since recovered, but the erratic market—whipped around by Trump's shifting proclamations about tariffs—scares many middle-class Boomers, who are watching their retirement savings shrink. In the near future, older Americans might find themselves paying more for medical care too. Trump's 'big, beautiful bill,' which has passed in the House but awaits a vote in the Senate, would substantially limit Medicare access for many documented immigrants, including seniors who have paid taxes in the United States for years. The bill would also reduce Medicaid enrollment by about 10.3 million people. Although Medicaid is for people with limited incomes of all ages, it supports many older Americans and pays for more than half of long-term care in the U.S. Most seniors require some sort of nursing home or at-home medical care; one study found that 70 percent of adults who live to 65 will require long-term services and support. That support may soon be not only more expensive, but harder to come by. The long-term-care workforce is disproportionately made up of immigrants, so the Trump administration's immigration crackdown is likely to reduce the number of people available to take care of seniors—and increase how much it costs to hire them. 'If you have no money, you'll be on Medicaid in a nursing home, and that's that. But if you're trying to avoid that fate, you're now going to run through your money more quickly and be more vulnerable,' Morrissey said. Seniors with some financial security are more likely to live long enough to contend with the diseases of old age, such as Alzheimer's and dementia. The Trump administration has cut funding for promising research on these diseases. 'Going forward, you'll find less treatments reaching fruition,' Thomas Grabowski, who directs the Memory and Brain Wellness Center at the University of Washington, told me. For now, the UW Memory and Brain Wellness Center, where Grabowski works on therapies for Alzheimer's, has stopped bringing in new participants; as time goes on, he said, they'll have to tighten more. (Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson, told me in an email that the cuts to research funded by the National Institutes of Health are 'better positioning' the agency 'to deliver on medical breakthroughs that actually improve Americans' health and wellbeing.') Changes at the UW Memory and Brain Wellness Center could have dramatic effects on current patients, including Bob Pringle, a 76-year-old who lives in Woodinville, Washington. In April, he started getting infusions of donanemab, an anti-amyloid medication approved by the FDA last year. The drug doesn't cure Alzheimer's; it's designed to slow the disease's progression, though the utility of donanemab and other Alzheimer's drugs remains controversial among experts. Pringle, for one, has found donanemab helpful. 'With the medication, my decline is a gentle slope, rather than a rapid decline,' says Pringle, whose mother died of Alzheimer's and whose sister lives in a memory-care facility. 'You're always hopeful that somebody with a bigger brain than you have is working on a cure, and the medication gives us some time until then,' Bob's wife and caretaker, Tina Pringle, told me. 'But right now, because of the funding cuts, our outlook is grim.' The unknowability of the future has always been a scary part of getting older. The enormous upheaval that the Trump administration has created will only magnify that uncertainty for Boomers. After a historical arc of good fortune, their golden generation has to contend with bad timing. Younger generations, including my own, shouldn't gloat, though: Cuts to Social Security and a halt to medical research could well worsen the experience of aging for generations to come. Younger Americans will likely grow old under challenging conditions too. Unlike the Boomers, we'll have plenty of time to get used to the idea.
