Crisis, what crisis? Reform welcomes Zia Yusuf back 48 hours after he quit as chairman - and he'll work with Brexiteer who accused him of having 'struggled with people'
Richard Tice said Mr Yusuf had 'done a brilliant job in growing the party' and suggested he quit because of 'exhaustion' and working for 11 months 'without a day off'.
The former banker abruptly U-turned on his decision to quit last night, returning to Reform to lead its plans to cut public spending.
The ex-chairman will also take part in policymaking, fundraising and media appearances.
However his decision to come back to lead the so-called 'UK Doge', based on the US Department of Government Efficiency formerly led by tech billionaire Elon Musk, may raise some eyebrows.
He will be working alongside another millionaire, the Brexit backer Arron Banks, in councils run by Reform to route out supposed waste.
Mr Banks, who stood as a Reform candidate in the local elections in May, said this morning that Mr Yusuf's return was 'an inspirational move' that played to the strengths of someone who was 'a brilliant communicator with the media and a genius on tech'.
However, on Friday night, after Mr Yusuf resigned, he was less complimentary, tweeting: 'Zia worked very hard but struggled with relationships and people. The corks will be popping in party HQ this evening.. Reform will power on …'
Mr Yusuf said he was quitting Reform following the latest in a series of internal rows, in which he described a question to the Prime Minister concerning a ban on burkas from his party's newest MP as 'dumb'.
Party leader Nigel Farage, speaking to the Sunday Times newspaper alongside Mr Yusuf, said the former chairman will return and effectively be doing 'four jobs', though his title has not yet been decided.
This morning it was put to Mr Tice that it does not look very professional for Reform's chairman to be in, out, then back in again.
He told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme: 'Zia Yusuf has done a brilliant job in growing the party, creating huge infrastructure, over 400 branches, but it's a massive job and as we were growing incredibly fast, essentially that job was too much for one person, so we're reorganising, and I'm delighted that Zia is staying with the party, and he's going to be focusing on our Doge unit.
'There is so much waste you've been talking about, how does the Government find more money?
'Well, the best thing is to stop wasting money. I'm afraid, what we're discovering as we look under the bonnet of the 10 councils that we are now in control of, is there's waste everywhere, and it's got to stop.
'That's what Zia is going to focus on, as well as fundraising. So it's great news he's with us.'
Meanwhile, shadow home secretary Chris Philp called Reform UK a 'protest party' and said it is offering 'populist policies that are essentially Liz Truss on steroids'.
Asked if it is time for the Conservatives to think about a more constructive approach to Reform, he told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips on Sky News: 'Nigel Farage is saying he wants to destroy the Conservative Party, which makes it quite difficult to work together.
'I mean, they're all essentially a protest party.
'You just asked about Liz Truss… they're offering populist policies that are essentially Liz Truss on steroids.'
Announcing his resignation on Thursday afternoon, Mr Yusuf said: 'I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office.'
Mr Yusuf said he had been left feeling undervalued by some in the party and drained after being subjected to relentless racist abuse on X, and that he made the comments in 'error'.
He added: 'I spoke to Nigel and said I don't mind saying I made an error. It was a function of exhaustion.'
Asked about the row over talk of banning the burka, Mr Yusuf said he 'certainly did not resign because I have any strong views about the burka itself' but felt blindsided by Sarah Pochin's question to Sir Keir Starmer.
He said: 'If there were a vote and I was in Parliament, I would probably vote to ban it actually,' but that 'philosophically I am always a bit uneasy about banning things which, for example, would be unconstitutional in the United States, which such a ban no doubt would be'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 minutes ago
- The Independent
Alexander Isak accuses Newcastle of breaking promises amid transfer drama
Alexander Isak has accused Newcastle United of breaking promises and damaging trust, stating it is in everyone's best interests for him to leave the club. The striker claims Newcastle misrepresented his private conversations and that the club has long known his desire to depart. Liverpool's £110m bid for Isak was rejected, with Newcastle maintaining he is not for sale, despite the player's public stance. Isak has not featured for Newcastle in pre-season or their opening league match, training separately from the main squad. He scored 23 Premier League goals last season and was voted into the PFA team of the season but chose not to attend the awards ceremony due to the ongoing situation.
Daily Mail
2 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Now Rachel Reeves plans a 'mansion tax' as Chancellor 'seeks to hit owners of high-value properties' with capital gains raid when they sell up
is eyeing a 'mansion tax' on the owners of high-value properties as she scrambles to plug a £50billion hole in the public finances, it has emerged. The Chancellor is reportedly drawing up plans to end the current exemption from capital gains tax when some people sell their main home. This would see those on the higher rate of income tax pay 24 per cent of the value of any 'gain' they make from the increase in the value of their property. And those on the basic rate of income tax would pay 18 per cent. According to The Times, Ms Reeves' plans would see the 'private residence relief' from capital gains currently enjoyed by homeowners scrapped for some properties. The threshold at which the relief would end is currently being discussed within the Treasury, the newspaper added. It is estimated a threshold of £1.5million would hit around 120,000 homeowners who are higher-rate taxpayers with capital gains tax bills of £199,973. The Chancellor is said to be considering using her autumn Budget to unveil the capital gains tax raid. She is estimated by economists to be facing a £50billion black hole ahead of her next fiscal statement, which is widely expected to see Ms Reeves hike taxes once again. The Chancellor is reportedly drawing up plans to end the current exemption from capital gains tax when some people sell their main home It has also been claimed that the Chancellor is eyeing a radical shake-up of stamp duty and council tax, as well as a fresh inheritance tax raid. Property experts warned Ms Reeves' imposition of a 'mansion tax' could merely discourage the owners of expensive properties from selling up. This would gum up the property market and limit the amount of money the Treasury might raise. They also expressed concerns that pensioners who have seen property values rocket since buying their homes might be left unable to downsize. What is private residence relief? You do not pay capital gains tax when you sell your home if all of the following apply: you have one home and you've lived in it as your main home for all the time you've owned it you have not let part of it out - this does not include having a lodger you have not used a part of your home exclusively for business purposes (using a room as a temporary or occasional office does not count as exclusive business use) the grounds, including all buildings, are less than 5,000 square metres (just over an acre) in total you did not buy it just to make a gain If all these apply you will automatically get a tax relief called 'private residence relief and will have no tax to pay. If any of them apply, you may have some tax to pay. Aneisha Beveridge, head of research at Hamptons, said: 'It's a big change that would hit long-term owners hardest and create a cliff-edge at £1.5million, distorting behaviour around that point. 'While the headline gains look substantial, they're often the result of decades of ownership and, in some cases, house prices haven't even kept pace with inflation. 'For households who don't need to move, this could act as a strong disincentive to sell, dampening transactions and potentially weighing on house price growth and Treasury revenues alike.' Tom Bill, from Knight Frank, suggested the capital gains tax raid might not raise much money for Ms Reeves. He said: 'I'd be surprised if there are any gains to tax at the top end of the property market, given that prices in prime central London are down 20 per cent over the last decade. 'If there was anything that reduced demand further, then the prospect of gains in the short-term would pretty much vanish.' Simon Brown, of property data company Landmark Information Group, said: 'Any tax that rises with property value risks slowing the housing market even further. 'If downsizing becomes less attractive, larger family homes stay off the market and transaction volumes fall. 'This reduces overall movement in the market upwards and downwards, and not only reduces choice for families and first-time buyers, but also hits the Treasury by shrinking the tax base.' Ms Reeves was already facing a furious backlash over a possible and highly controversial shake-up of property levies. The Chancellor was warned that proposals to replace stamp duty with an annual charge on homes worth more than £500,000 would damage the market as well as punish people who have worked hard to own their houses. One of her Treasury ministers refused to rule out the possibility of her introducing the radical change in the Budget. The Guardian reported that owners of houses worth more than £500,000 could have to pay a 'proportional property tax' based on the value of their properties when they sell up. However, sources played down the claims that Treasury officials are looking at this proposal or threshold. Sources also moved away from suggestions that civil servants are drawing on the findings of a report published last year by think-tank Onward, which proposed that only future owners could pay an annual tax based on the value of the property instead of stamp duty. Under the plan put forward by economist Professor Tim Leunig, current homeowners would not be hit by the charge, but if they do sell up in future their buyers would pay the levy each year instead of stamp duty at the point of purchase. It is intended to open up the property market by making it less expensive to move and encouraging those in large homes to downsize. TV presenter Kirstie Allsopp warned the Chancellor not to risk destabilising the market by 'flying kites' about potential new property taxes, telling Times Radio: 'It's not Rachel's to go after because it's their homes. 'It's the roof over their head. And this Government seems to want to punish people for making the sacrifices they've made to buy their own homes.' The Treasury declined to comment on 'speculation' about future changes to tax policy. A spokesperson said: 'As set out in the Plan for Change, the best way to strengthen public finances is by growing the economy – which is our focus. 'Changes to tax and spend policy are not the only ways of doing this, as seen with our planning reforms, which are expected to grow the economy by £6.8billion and cut borrowing by £3.4billion 'We are committed to keeping taxes for working people as low as possible, which is why at last autumn's Budget, we protected working people's payslips and kept our promise not to raise the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax, employee National Insurance, or VAT.'
Telegraph
3 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Reeves's fiscal recklessness is causing even more pain than we feared
The government's spin doctors could always try blaming Oasis, although given the robust, four-lettered response it is likely to provoke from the Gallagher brothers it may not be the wisest course of action. It is just possible that the sky high costs of tickets and hotel rooms for their reunion tour may have nudged up the index a fraction. And yet, it is already clear that today's terrible inflation data, with prices rising by far more than the City expected, is entirely the fault of the government. In reality, the Chancellor Rachel Reeves has plunged Britain into an inflationary doom loop – and she has no way out of it. The 3.8 per cent inflation rate reported today by the Office for National Statistics was far worse than expected. The rate at which prices are rising has now almost doubled since Labour won the general election. Sure, we can pin some of the blame for that on the Bank of England. It is hard to know what the Bank thought it was doing when it cut interest rates to 4 per cent last week. In effect, we now have a 'real' interest rate of just 0.2 per cent, far too low to control inflation. The catastrophic decision to push up employer's National Insurance has fed directly into prices in the shops, just as the economic textbooks said that it would. Driving up the living wage to one of the highest levels in the world, and putting up business rates, has meant those costs and lavish public sector pay awards have pushed up wages for private businesses, and those have been passed on in higher prices as well. Inflation is fairly subdued across most of the developed world, with the rate running at just 2 per cent in the euro-zone. It is just in Britain that it is soaring again, and it is driven entirely by the government's recklessness. The trouble is, higher inflation is going to make the fiscal mess Reeves faces far, far worse. Gilt yields will go higher, and the £111 billion, or 8.3 per cent of total public spending, we were already forecast by the Office for Budget Responsibility to spend on debt interest this year may go to £120 billion or even £130 billion. The triple lock will mean pensions have to go up more than forecast, and so will many welfare payments, while the public sector unions will demand higher wages to compensate for higher prices. Reeves will have to raise taxes by a punishing amount in the autumn Budget, but those will have to be passed on to consumers as well, sparking yet more price rises, higher inflation, and then even higher taxes. In reality, the Chancellor has plunged the UK into an inflationary doom loop. The only way to bring rising prices back under control is this. The Bank needs to push up interest rates to 6 per cent or more, while the government needs to make deep cuts in public spending, starting with welfare, and public sector salaries. There is almost no chance of this government admitting that, or making the tough decisions that are now needed to get the nation's finances back in shape. Instead, it will try to muddle through until a crisis in the bond markets forces the UK to change direction – and that day of reckoning may be a lot closer than anyone inside the complacent Westminster bubble realises right now.
