Can anything stop Reform?
MPs may have departed Westminster for recess, but that also marks the firing of a starting gun on a highly consequential political summer. In Downing Street and the Treasury, work is under way on Sir Keir Starmer's party conference speech, the next Budget and a reorganisation of No. 10, in what's seen as a vital reset after Labour's turbulent first year in power. The government is facing two political onslaughts. The first is from Reform on crime, as Farage's six-week campaign, launched on Monday, promises 'zero tolerance' policing, 'nightingale prisons' and 30,000 new police officers. The second is from the Tories on the economy, as the Treasury prepares for tax rises this autumn.
The question is no longer 'Could Reform win?' but 'Can anything stop them?'. The expectation is that Farage's party will pick up thousands of seats in the Welsh, Scottish and local elections next May and emerge as the largest party in 2029. 'The polls are much stickier than we expected,' a Reform source says. 'We could be the next government.' They are optimistic of winning in Wales and making gains in outer London boroughs next year and are eyeing councils in Norfolk, Suffolk, Hampshire, Coventry, Dudley and Tameside.
One answer to what can stop Farage might once have been Farage himself, whose intensity used to waver between elections. Now allies describe a man for whom a working day of 4.30 a.m. to 11 p.m. is not unusual. 'All his bodyguards are ex-SAS and parachute regiment and they're knackered trying to keep up,' one friend says. 'He spent three days preparing for that crime press conference so he was across the detail. There is a seriousness there. Does he want to be prime minister? I'm not sure he does. But he feels: if not him, then who? He feels it's his duty, and perhaps his destiny.'
Farage's allies point to an incident before his return to frontline politics last year, while he was campaigning in Skegness. 'This guy said to him: 'Thank you for coming here, Nigel, but why are you letting us down?' You could see Nigel's eyes go down. He knew he needed to get back in and fight for these people.'
Another answer might once have been the sense that Reform is a 'boys' club' – yet at his press conference on Monday Farage was flanked by the Reform MP Sarah Pochin, a former magistrate, and Laila Cunningham, a Westminster councillor and ex-prosecutor who defected from the Tories. On Tuesday he announced the defection of Conservative Laura Anne Jones, now the party's first member of the Welsh Senedd. 'We used to be testosterone city,' says an insider, 'but these women are not window dressing.'
A third answer might once have been media scrutiny by the centre-right press, whose loyalties tended to lie with the Tories. In 2019, the Daily Mail harangued Farage to back Boris Johnson to 'save Brexit'. Yet Farage met senior media figures for 'peace talks' and coverage is now much friendlier. Farage (hotfooting it from Royal Ascot) turned up wearing union jack shoes at the summer party held by News UK, which owns the Sun, the Times and the Sunday Times, and also dined recently with Victoria Newton, the Sun's editor. Reform sources say that Rupert Murdoch 'has always liked Nigel because they are both disruptors'. Paper insiders say Murdoch is attracted to backing Reform, though his son Lachlan, the titular head of the company, is both less interested in British politics and less convinced by Farage. Newton apparently urged Farage to show that he is taking preparations for government seriously. 'Nigel doesn't need to be told these things,' a close ally notes.
Farage's nemesis could still be the Labour government with its huge majority. But he's not alone in being urged to get serious. 'There have been a procession of people, including Tony Blair, telling Keir 'This isn't working',' says one of those advising him. 'He needs far more good people around him and he needs to get serious about being prime minister and not just assume everything is going to turn out fine. He needs to use his power, not just occupy it.'
The PM's chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, has three priorities for the summer and autumn: getting Starmer's conference speech and the Budget to tell the same 'story' about what Labour is about and where it wants to take the country; getting the best people into No. 10; and improving relations with the parliamentary party.
A No. 10 reorganisation is coming, along with a reshuffle, probably in September. McSweeney is studying a report by Nathan Yeowell of the Future Governance Forum and Helen MacNamara, the former deputy cabinet secretary (published in mid-August), which recommends the creation of a new Downing Street department, with its own chief operating officer. Some would like to see MacNamara – the one official whose brains and cunning Dominic Cummings rated alongside his own – return to government.
The reorganisation is intended, in part, to bypass Sir Chris Wormald, the cabinet secretary, who is seen both as a block to reform and as the PM's most perverse appointment. 'They can't fire him,' explains an exasperated ally. 'They're just having to find ways to work around him.'
Wormald's critics are busily sharing two stories. The first is that he told another official how to bamboozle politicians by going into every meeting 'with a few QI points' – fascinating facts like those presented on the comedy quiz programme – to divert attention. The second is that he tried to impose Jeremy Pocklington, the permanent secretary at the Department of Energy, on the Ministry of Justice, against the wishes of Lord Chancellor Shabana Mahmood, because Pocklington needed the experience if he was to become cabinet secretary one day. This reinforced the idea that Wormald is more interested in civil service careerism than getting the best people to drive political change. Mahmood won the day.
Another key appointment will be an economics adviser for Starmer, a job which still lies vacant. There is talk of Torsten Bell, the pensions minister, taking the role, but others want a bigger hitter. Former Treasury mandarins Jon Cunliffe, Tom Scholar and John Kingman are all on the wish list. 'It has to be someone who can speak with authority to the Chancellor,' says one senior aide.
Starmer's critics will also have a close eye on his policy team, a frequent target of disapproval. Liz Lloyd, a Blair-era retread who runs delivery, led policy discussions at a recent cabinet away day. But ministers say her views differ from those of Olaf Henricson-Bell, the civil service policy chief, and Stuart Ingham, the PM's longest-serving aide, who many see as a problem. '[Ingham's] great at having a conversation about the history of progressivism, but he's not right for a government which needs snappy ideas that deliver,' a senior Labour figure says.
If Starmer fails to sort all this out, then not only will he be unable to face down Farage, he might even have to confront a leadership challenge. While Angela Rayner is the favourite, both Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan, the mayors of Manchester and London, are expected to make returns to parliament with half an eye on the succession.
Labour strategists are acutely aware that the party's annual conference is in Liverpool, where Hillsborough campaigners (supported by Burnham) still aren't happy with the government's plans to impose a 'duty of candour' on public servants to avoid a cover-up like the one which followed the deaths of the football fans. 'If they don't sort out Hillsborough, Andy will kill them at conference,' says one MP.
Could the Tories prove a thorn in Farage's side? The return of James Cleverly to the front bench in Kemi Badenoch's reshuffle this week gives the Tories another good media performer, but most of the others promoted are barely household names in their own households. Party membership has fallen by 8,000 since she became leader. At a summer party for Politico last week, one of her senior aides had a drink-fuelled argument with two former cabinet ministers over their demands for her to 'step it up'.
The appointment of Neil O'Brien, one of the brightest brains in the party, as policy chief was widely welcomed by Badenoch's critics. But the decision to make plain-speaking Yorkshireman Kevin Hollinrake party chairman was interpreted as evidence that Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) is still not match-fit for the local elections. His predecessors, the co-chairs Nigel Huddleston and Dominic Johnson, are both said to have contemplated resignation in recent months. 'The operation is a shitshow,' says one former CCHQ hand. 'They had so little power and were sick of carrying the can for failure.' Another former aide is circulating details of a recent focus group in which Badenoch was described by one voter as 'repulsive'.
So what might stop Farage? The best answer might be Reform themselves. Nick Candy, the treasurer, has not raised the millions he promised. Insiders say he has been distracted by his divorce from TV actress Holly Valance. 'She was more political than him,' a party source admits. 'Money is tight.'
Then there are the internal rivalries, which burst into the open again last week when Zia Yusuf, the former chairman, went public to accuse Suella Braverman, the former Home Secretary, of 'covering up' the decision to grant a superinjunction to hide the leak of data on Afghans who worked for Britain. Her husband, Rael Braverman, who defected from the Tories to Reform several months ago, resigned in disgust. 'Suella was quite close to defecting,' a source says. 'Rael urged Zia to take it down and he doubled down.'
Farage, in short, is not without his internal party problems and he might yet succumb to external attacks. 'Nigel is at the 'could' be the next government stage rather than the 'will' be stage,' an ally notes. But while it may be a long-distance race until the next general election, Reform remains the pace-setter of British politics.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
13 minutes ago
- Spectator
Reeves can't continue to ignore the entrepreneurs fleeing Britain
Major listed companies have already switched from London to New York. The non-doms are all fleeing for Milan and Dubai. And now it turns out that company directors are quitting Britain in record numbers. The exodus of entrepreneurs is accelerating all the time. And yet, so far the Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer have remained completely silent on the issue. Surely, sooner or later they will have to say something? An analysis by the Financial Times this week found that almost 3,700 company directors have left Britain over the last few months, almost double the number before the Budget. Given the time lags involved in filing data with Companies House, the total is likely to be far higher by now. We already had data suggesting that 16,500 millionaires have left Britain, the highest total in the world, while many high-profile non-doms have left, including Lakshmi Mittal, the founder of the steel empire ArcelorMittal, and Guillaume Pousaz, the founder of the fintech giant Checkout. Add it all up, and one point is clear. Entrepreneurs are leaving the UK. It is not hard to see why. The non-doms are now subject to British taxes on their global income, including one of the highest rates of inheritance tax in the world. Meanwhile, British entrepreneurs face a punishing combination of corporation tax, dividend tax, and income tax on any money their business makes, and they can no longer leave their company to their children without paying 40 per cent of its value to the state. We have created one of the most hostile environments in the world for company founders. And yet the Chancellor Rachel Reeves has remained completely silent on the issue, as has the Prime Minister. There are plenty of lines she could take. She could argue it doesn't matter and we don't need them. After all, we now have GB Energy and the National Wealth Fund, and they will create new industries. She could lambast the quitters as unpatriotic, shaming them for their reluctance to properly fund public services. Alternatively, she could slap an exit tax on them, as countries such as Sweden have done, to make it more expensive to leave than to stay. Or, most radically of all, Reeves could U-turn on some of her policies and offer some tax incentives to try and bring them back – or at least persuade any more from leaving. Each option would be a credible response. But surely just ignoring the issue is no longer an option? Sooner or later Labour will have to acknowledge the crisis and try to do something to stem it. Or else within a few years the UK will have no businesses left beside a few state-controlled monopolies.
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Fears of rise in uninsured drivers as insurance tax receipts soar
Consumers paid a total of nearly 9% more in a tax on insurance premiums last year, leading to fears of drivers becoming priced out of policies. The AA, which conducted the research, urged the Treasury to cut the rate of insurance premium tax (IPT) on motor policies by a quarter, with a 50% reduction for newly qualified drivers. The standard rate of IPT – which applies to premiums such as motor insurance – has been 12.0% since 2017. It was 2.5% when it was first introduced in 1994. Premiums being more expensive mean receipts from standard rate IPT totalled £692 million last year, up 8.6% from the previous 12 months. HM Revenue and Customs said the increase was partly caused by 'rising car and property insurance premiums'. AA president Edmund King told the PA news agency: 'Insurance premium tax on motor insurance is a tax on responsible ownership – protecting yourself and third parties from the financial damage of incidents and injuries. 'Surges in the cost of insurance over recent years have ratcheted up the pain for those most prone to paying high premiums. 'Many of those are people least able to afford it, such as young and newly qualified drivers with higher risk as well as low-income policyholders. 'That not only threatens to price them out of cover but tempts more to drive without insurance.' Drivers caught behind the wheel of a vehicle without insurance face a £300 fine and six penalty points. The most serious cases are taken to court, and offenders can receive an unlimited fine and disqualification from driving. A spokesperson for the Association of British Insurers (ABI) said: 'While we appreciate fiscal headroom is limited given pressures on public spending, we continue to believe that insurance premium tax is an unfair levy on a responsible purchase. 'Those who purchase insurance should not be penalised for trying to protect themselves, their loved ones and their property. 'We continue to call for IPT to be frozen until fiscal and financial conditions allow for the standard rate to be cut.' ABI figures show the average cost of motor cover last year was £622, representing a 15% (£78) jump from 2023. This followed a 25% (£109) annual rise from 2022 to 2023. The ABI said total claims payouts rose by 17% in 2024, and stressed that 'work must continue' to tackle the cost of insurance. It wants the Government to focus on issues such as reducing vehicle theft and insurance fraud, and boosting recruitment in the vehicle repair sector. It noted the average cost of policies in the first three months of 2025 was 7% lower than a year earlier. A taskforce led by the Treasury and the Department for Transport focused on the rising cost of car insurance was established in October last year. The body, which brings together industry and consumer groups, is expected to publish its final report in the autumn. A Treasury spokesperson said: 'The overall cost of insurance is determined only in part by insurance premium tax, which contributes over £8 billion a year towards vital public services. 'Our cross-Government taskforce on motor insurance will deliver on our commitment to support drivers by finding ways to tackle the high cost of motor insurance.'
Western Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Rachel Reeves should exempt defence pledge from budget rules, says Gordon Brown
The former prime minister said the commitment to spend 5% of GDP on national security by 2035 should be dealt with jointly as a 'Nato initiative', with costs shared across Europe. Leading economists have warned the Chancellor will likely have to raise taxes in the autumn budget to plug a £51 billion black hole in the public finances. Ms Reeves is currently on track to miss one of her borrowing rules by £41.2 billion and needs to rebuild a fiscal buffer of nearly £10 billion that has been wiped out, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (Niesr). Mr Brown, who served as chancellor for a decade in Sir Tony Blair's Labour administration, said on Thursday that the rise in defence spending should be treated as 'exceptional', as it has been in Germany. 'When you come to the fiscal position, look, there's one thing that's happened over the last few months that has been quite unprecedented – to spend 5% on defence expenditure as we want to spend by the 2030s,' he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Economists have warned taxes will likely need to rise in the autumn budget to meet a shortfall in the public finances (PA) 'But this is a Nato initiative, this is a European initiative. We should be doing this jointly. 'We should have either jointly issued bonds or a Nato defence fund, and we should be sharing the cost across the continent, and that should be regarded as something extraordinary and exceptional, outside the fiscal rules. 'That would create the kind of headroom that Rachel Reeves needs.' Germany has exempted some defence spending from its strict borrowing rules – the so-called 'debt brake' – to allow an increase in expenditure. When she entered the Treasury, Ms Reeves set out two key fiscal restrictions which she has said are 'non-negotiable'. The first rule is to ensure that day-to-day spending is matched by tax revenues so the Government only borrows to invest, and the second is to reduce net financial debt as a share of the economy. Ministers have already announced a cut to overseas aid to fund a boost in defence spending but economists have said the new Nato target of 5% by 2035 could increase expenditure by a further £38.6 billion. The Treasury has been contacted for comment.
