What to Expect From Reeves' UK Spending Review
00:00
James, what can we expect then from this spending review for the chancellor. A crucial day for her and her team. What are you going to be scrutinizing? I mean, the reason it's crucial is this is a fifth of the UK economy in size 600 billion a year. We know that 200 billion is going to be the NHS, 39 billion defence. 94 in education, what is happening to the rest and also what is happening to the 134 billion they've put aside for capital investment? Of that we expect to see some go to housing roughly 40 billion and some get around investment. They've announced that 15 billion. This is the moment that Rachel Reeves says I was elected a Labour chancellor to do X and we find out what X is today and they're going to lean in. The expectations are they will lean in to that £134 billion, I should say, capital expenditures plan. That's the kind of headline they want to be pushing. What what is this going to mean for that for the chancellor who's seen the ratings in terms of the polls, not just for her, but the prime minister as well plummet on some of these decisions? Is this kind of a break, a make or break moment for the chancellor? How decisive is this moment going to be for that for the head of the UK Treasury? The way I would explain it is today we are casting a political die as the government, not the polls, not the politics, but the economics. The cold, hard cash. The shape of the next election will be decided today. The last spending review was done in Covid by Rishi Sunak, the one before that was 2015 pre Brexit. That's the kind of size of the event we are talking about today. And like you say, this could be the comeback moment for the Chancellor. Where growth comes from, this investment comes from this private sector is rejuvenated from this. It could also be the moment we find some quite difficult cuts and we find out about very tough decisions the UK Government will have to take in the years going forward.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Lack of liquidity' the key factor in decline of the LSE
A lack of liquidity due to a relatively low appetite for investment in the UK is the main factor behind the decline of the London Stock Exchange (LSE), according to a commercial growth expert. Speaking on an episode of GlobalData's Instant Insights podcast, Carrie Osman, founder and CEO of growth consultancy Cruxy, suggested there are a range of factors behind companies choosing to list elsewhere or delisting, including some structural, but that, in her view, liquidity is the main issue. 'It doesn't have the liquidity, it doesn't have the buoyancy, and it doesn't, quite frankly, attract the most innovative technologies to list in London because of the fact that there doesn't seem to be the appetite from an investment pool to provide the liquidity that obviously some of these founders or private equity firms are looking for,' Osman said. 'Ultimately, you're looking for people to back your concept or idea, and you're looking for them to believe in that with their money to buy shares in your company and say, 'Yes, I believe that you're going to make me a lot of money. Let's go long here.' I was looking at some facts, and I thought it's very interesting that, for example, in the UK, about 23% of adults have stocks and shares. When we compare that to the US, it's 62%.' Osman was speaking following the announcement that Qualcomm has acquired UK-based semiconductor company Alphawave Semi, resulting in another high-profile departure from the LSE. She pointed to that deal as just one example of the challenges facing the LSE but noted that it wasn't just the UK exchange facing such issues. 'When you look at Europe as a whole, I think [there are] 183 European listings, and only about 15% of those are listed in their home turf,' she said. 'So, I think it probably is kind of far and wide when you look at Europe as a whole.' Osman believes the lesser culture for investing in the UK compared to the US – where individuals are exposed to investing through the 401(k) retirement savings plan – is limiting the potential of the LSE. 'How could you encourage people to kind of play an active role in the market?' she said. 'Maybe teach them about the market, teach them about stocks, teach them about trading. And then, of course, maybe there are ways that we could use tax incentives to encourage either companies or, of course, employees to be able to feel like they can invest in the markets without feeling like it's so much of a risk.' 'It always feels like it's less of a risk to just stick your money in an ISA and fingers crossed the Bank of England doesn't reduce the rate too much. That was how I was brought up. I think it would be amazing to think that there's a way to encourage more slight risk taking but with a bit of a support layer there so that people feel they can invest in our country and invest in some of our great assets.' Osman also pointed to the Private Intermittent Securities and Capital Exchange System (PISCES) as a means of encouraging investment. Per the UK's Financial Conduct Authority, 'PISCES is a new type of private stock market that will give investors more opportunities to buy stakes in growing companies.' 'If I own shares in a company, I can trade those shares without listing it publicly, so that there'll be these kind of trading windows,' Osman explained. 'So, I can trade those shares, and an asset manager can buy them all. But the thing that concerns me about that is that it's only secondaries, so it's only certain people they decide can do that, who are professional investors, whatever that means. 'And who decides the price? Is this just regulation? All the positive consequences, but it ends up with a lot of regulation on regulation, and it ends up with a lot of complexity? I'm worried that that could end up being a lot of positive intent, but maybe it doesn't lead to that outcome of driving liquidity that they would hope.' "'Lack of liquidity' the key factor in decline of the LSE" was originally created and published by Investment Monitor, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Medscape
26 minutes ago
- Medscape
RCGP Urges Support to Save Declining GP Partnership Model
The Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) has warned that GP partnerships are under threat, as the number of partners in England has dropped by 25% over the past decade. In a new report, the college urged action to 'break down barriers to partnership' and called for modernisation of the model to make it more attractive to younger doctors. While the RCGP reaffirmed its support for the independent contractor model, it said there was 'room for modernisation and innovation', and backed ' a mixed economy' of contractual models to deliver general practice. Shift in Workforce Between 2015 and 2025, the number of GP partners in England fell from 24,491 to 18,367. Over the same period, the number of salaried GPs rose by 81%, from 10,270 in September 2015 to 18,557 in December 2024. As of June 2024, GP partners were a minority among fully qualified GPs for the first time. The most significant drop in partnership was seen in younger doctors. Among GPs aged 30-34, numbers fell by 72.9%. The only age group to show growth was those aged 60-64, up by 19.5%. Barriers to Partnership Rising workload, administrative burdens, and concerns about financial risk were cited as major deterrents to partnership. Professor Kamila Hawthorne, RCGP chair, said that many GPs were discouraged by the unlimited personal liability that comes with being a partner. She also pointed to the responsibilities of owning or leasing premises and managing staff, especially as patient demand increases. Exploring Alternatives The RCGP report explored alternative business models that could support general practice, including limited companies, limited liability partnerships (LLPs), and community benefit societies. The college maintained that partnerships still offered flexibility and potential for innovation, particularly if financial and workload pressures could be reduced. In 2024, more than half (55%) of RCGP members said they would be more likely to consider partnership if financial risks were lower. A review by Lord Darzi highlighted the financial discipline of GP partnerships, noting that they could not run large deficits like other parts of the NHS. Earlier this year, the Nuffield Trust described the current GP partnership model as 'withering'. The health think tank warned that the government's plans to improve GP access were at risk due to the fall in partner numbers. Thea Stein, chief executive of the Nuffield Trust, told Medscape News UK : 'It is hard to see partnership being the dominant model in the future.' She called for support where the model works well, but said new models must also be explored. Hawthorne maintained that 'there are elements of the traditional GP partnership that can be improved and modernised, while retaining its core strengths'. The GP partnership model has huge benefits for the NHS and for patients, she added. Government Response A Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) spokesperson acknowledged the strengths of the partnership model, including efficiency, innovation, and continuity of care. 'However, we also recognise that this is not the only model delivering general practice,' the spokesperson told Medscape News UK . 'GP practices can choose to organise themselves in different ways and also provide good outcomes in terms of staff engagement and patient experience.'
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Boeing plane crash in India: What it means for the aircraft maker
A London-bound Air India Boeing (BA) 787 Dreamliner aircraft holding 242 passengers and crew crashed in India. Boyd Group International president and Synovus vice president and senior portfolio manager Mike Boyd joins Morning Brief with Brad Smith to discuss the latest. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Morning Brief here. An Air India Boeing 787 Dreamliner crashed shortly after takeoff on Thursday. Thick plumes of black smoke seen over the airport in video taken by bystanders. 242 passengers and crew members were on board the flight heading to London's Gatwick Airport. The plane crashed into a building housing medical students, according to local media. Aftermath from the scene showed billowing smoke rising over the area and firefighters on charred streets. Air India confirmed the flight was involved in an accident after takeoff in a post on X. India's Prime Minister Narendra Modi called the tragedy heartbreaking beyond words. In a statement Thursday, Boeing said it's in contact with Air India regarding flight 171 and stands ready to support them. Our thoughts are with the passengers, crew, first responders, and all affected. Boeing's safety record has faced scrutiny following two fatal crashes of its 737 Max aircraft in 2018 and 2019 that led to more than 340 deaths. The FAA ordered an inspection of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner back in 2024 after a midair dive on a Latam flight in March injured more than 50 passengers. A whistleblower last year also urged Boeing to ground all 787 Dreamliners worldwide, claiming there were flaws in the plane's assembly. Boeing rejected the claims by the former engineer and said it was fully confident in the plane. Joining me now, we've got Mike Boyd, Boyd Group International President. Mike, thanks for taking some time and hopping on with us this morning. After a tragedy like this, should passengers be worried about flying on Boeing planes? But specifically as we're looking across some of the large plane manufacturing that they do, some of the negligence that's come to be known and the changes that they're making, is it swiftly enough? It is uh the two aren't really connected at this point in time. You know, there's there's no indication whatsoever, you know, that what that whistleblower brought up and I I looked very heavily at that and what happened today, there's no indication. These airplanes, 10, 11 years old, okay, it's been flying around. So the real issue is should some people feel safe about flying? The answer is absolutely yes. And we'll know more about this in a few days because between the NTSB and the US which is going to be on the scene and the Indian uh uh investigators, we'll we'll have some a pretty good idea of what really did happen with this specific airplane. We do know as well this year, 75 to 80 deliveries are projected of this 787 Dreamliner versus the 51 in 2024. Just how vastly different is Boeing today versus some of the issues that they faced in 2018, 2019? Well, in 2018, 2019, let's put it right on the line. They were an incompetently managed airline airplane manufacturer. They didn't know what they were doing. They were looking at stock price. The fact of the matter today, they are much more rationally run air airplane manufacturer. Plus, the FAA is on the scene all the time. Now keep in mind, the FAA was involved with the poor oversight before, but right now, uh there's a lot more going on at Boeing to make sure that they're doing things right because they weren't doing it back in 2019. There are many more details that we're waiting to come from the crash in India. This also internationally comes at a time where many of the airline operators as well as manufacturers like Boeing are gearing up to head to this International Air Show as well in Paris. How does this perhaps change some of the conversations that take place if if at all? Well, it it depends on what they were planning to do. If they were doing a a giant, you know, corkscrew flyby of a 787, I think that's canceled right now for that air show. But I think the bottom line of it there it's basically a show and tell of order books. So I don't think it'll have much effect on it at all and Boeing's been through this kind of thing before. You just don't keep bringing it up and bringing it up. So I I think for Boeing sales, it's not going to have an effect unless we find out something catastrophic and I don't think we will. What are some of the first questions that you imagine regulators and those who are investigating will need to bring to light and hopefully the public get some more answers around? Well, I think in this case, I mean, they're reportedly, uh the crew did call back with a Mayday saying, we've lost power. And it looked like, you know, from the videos, it's like candid camera everywhere nowadays. It it sort of this pancaked into the neighborhood. So they'll be looking at things like fuel, they'll be looking at things like pilot records, they'll be looking at maintenance records. I'm I say will be, I'll guarantee you they're doing it right now. Mike, thanks so much for monitoring this story and joining us this morning on short notice as well. My pleasure, sir. Thank you.
