Starmer is driving Britain into ‘irrelevance', warns healthcare boss
Sir Keir Starmer is driving the UK into 'irrelevance', the boss of one of Britain's fastest-growing healthcare companies has warned.
Dan Vahdat, chief executive of global healthcare firm Huma Therapeutics, said years of high taxes and a permanent aversion to risk had made the UK an increasingly uncompetitive place to do business.
Huma, which worked with the NHS during the pandemic to help monitor Covid patients at home, is one of dozens of technology 'unicorns' in Britain – a start-up with a value of more than $1bn (£800m).
However, Mr Vahdat said he was spending increasing amounts of time in the US, where Huma has announced a tie-up with pharmaceutical giant Pfizer.
Mr Vahdat said the world's biggest economy had a better work ethic and deeper pots of cash to grow his business.
The entrepreneur said he knew dozens of people who had left or were planning to leave the UK because of changes to Britain's non-dom regime, reforms that were started by the Tories and but deepened by Labour.
He also rebuked Rachel Reeves's decision to increase business asset disposal relief to 18pc in 2026, which he said would discourage people from setting up new businesses.
'It started under the Conservatives but then obviously the new government changed it even more which has led almost everybody that I know – entrepreneurs and executives – saying they will leave by April this year because of inheritance tax.
'And that's not good. Because if you are in a place where all the executives are leaving, nobody else will want to come.'
The Iranian-born entrepreneur also warned the Prime Minister that the UK could quickly be left behind in the AI race unless it sent a clearer message that Britain was open for business
Mr Vahdat said: 'We cannot miss this, because if we miss this, we'll close our eyes and open it 10 years later and be so far behind.
'I have seen how a great country can go from all to nothing with my own eyes. From Egypt to Persia to the Ottoman Empire, they were all the greatest places. And now they're irrelevant. The UK has all the great foundations, including the talent, but every year we lose out, we lose more and it gets harder to bounce back.'
Mr Vahdat said he remained loyal to the UK because it gave him a platform to set up a business.
However, asked where he would list his company if given the opportunity today, Mr Vahdat said: 'From how things look like today, there isn't any point for us to list in the UK.
'Number one, it's the mindset of investors in the UK. They prefer dividends and to play it safe, they prefer low multiples. If you go and tell them I want to build the biggest healthcare company in the world they will laugh at you.
'But as laughable as it is, if that person doesn't give up, they may succeed and that is what the US is great for.'
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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
29 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
London Breed's former chief of staff to lead urban think tank SPUR
Sean Elsbernd, a former member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors who most recently served as chief of staff to former Mayor London Breed, has been tapped to become chief executive officer of the urban think tank SPUR. Elsbernd will replace Alicia John-Baptiste, who left the position in February to become chief of infrastructure, climate and mobility for Mayor Daniel Lurie. A city hall insider who has served as both an elected politician and low-key, behind-the-scenes power broker, Elsbernd led city and county operations for Breed and oversaw the city's regional partnerships and state legislative work. He previously served as state director for the late U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein. 'Sean is a thoughtful and values-driven leader with deep knowledge of how Bay Area government works and how to build strong public partnerships that move policy forward,' said Lydia Tan, Chair of SPUR's Board of Directors. 'He understands SPUR's mission and brings the experience and vision we need to lead the organization into its next chapter.' SPUR, which has offices in San Jose, Oakland and San Francisco, bills itself as a 'good government' think tank that publishes policy reports laying out the case for how to improve public transit, preserve the environment, build more housing and make government more efficient and effective. Recent policy reports include: '10 ideas for equitable transportation in Oakland'; how the Bay Area could grow its population without increasing water demand; and how to reform the region's sales taxes. While SPUR doesn't endorse individual candidates its ideas are often in sync with the moderate faction of the city's political spectrum while its board of directors and membership is dominated by real estate developers, architects, nonprofit leaders and affordable housing leaders. Recently, Mayor Daniel Lurie implemented SPUR's recommendation to reorganize the Mayor's Office and create new roles to improve collaboration and accountability. SPUR also played a central role in advocating for $5.1 billion in state funding that included $400 million for Bay Area transit operations. Elsbernd has held several transit leadership roles, including serving as Chair of the Caltrain Board of Directors and as a Director of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District. He led San Francisco's COVID response, providing oversight of the Department of Public Health and Department of Emergency Management. 'Having worked with Sean for years in various roles, I know he is the right person to help SPUR boost our local economies, advance new ideas and reforms and improve the lives of our residents,' said Caltrain Executive Director Michelle Bouchard. Elsbernd officially assumes the role later this month and has already begun working closely with staff, the board of directors and regional leaders to carry the organization's mission forward, according to SPUR. The organization, which holds regular talks and panels at its Urban Center at 654 Mission St., had $5.9 million in expenses in the last fiscal year. It generated $4.6 million in revenues – a combination of membership fees, grants and special events. The nonprofit took in another in another $1.3 million in donations, according to the group's annual report. 'I'm honored to be joining SPUR,' Elsbernd said. 'Throughout my public service career, I've admired SPUR's work from both inside local government and as a resident of this region. The chance to lead an organization that's driving practical, forward-looking solutions is a privilege.'
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Growing Fears of Massive Strikes On Iran As Nuclear Negotiations Sputter
U.S. President Donald Trump has been presented with a broad array of potential military options against Iran should ongoing nuclear negotiations with that country fail. Israel is already reportedly moving ever closer to at least being in a position to launch its own strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The direct and indirect blowback from any such operations against Iran could be immense. Fears that U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks are on the verge of collapse have been steadily growing in the past week or so amid statements from both sides outlining potentially intractable positions. Iran's ability to continue domestic enrichment of nuclear material that could be used to produce nuclear weapons has emerged as a key stumbling block to reaching a deal. 'If the President directed [it], is CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command] prepared to respond with overwhelming force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran?' Congressman Mike Rogers, an Alabama Republican, asked U.S. Army Gen. Michael 'Erik' Kurilla at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee today. Kurilla is currently head of CENTCOM, making him the top officer overseeing operations across the Middle East. 'I have provided the Secretary of Defense [Pete Hegseth] and the President [Trump] a wide range of options,' Kurilla said in response. 'I take that as a yes?' Rogers, the present chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, asked in return, appearing to refer to the specific wording of his question, to include the possible use of 'overwhelming force.' 'Yes,' Kurrila said. Top U.S. military commander in the Middle East General Kurilla confirms that he has presented military options on Iran to President Trump & SecDef Hegseth in House Armed Services Committee this morning. — Brian Katulis (@Katulis) June 10, 2025 It is important to note here that U.S. presidents and defense secretaries regularly ask to be briefed on potential military options in light of crises or heightened risks of one erupting. Being presented with a full range of operational possibilities, including large-scale strikes or other significant direct action, does not mean the United States is automatically committed to pursuing any specific course of action, something we will come back to later on. Publicly, Trump has consistently advocated for reaching a deal with Iran to avoid any need to take military action, though he has also raised the possibility of military action in the event talks reach a dead end. He has separately said that he has pressed his Israeli counterpart, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to hold off on striking Iranian targets while negotiations are ongoing. There have been reports of significant friction between the two world leaders, as well. Amid all this, the U.S. president is said to be facing increasingly intense pressure from a faction of domestic political allies to acquiesce to and/or join in on Israeli attacks on Iran, according to a new report just today from Politico. There have been reports for weeks already that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have been actively planning and otherwise preparing to launch strikes on Iran, and the country's nuclear sites in particular. Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported yesterday that those plans continue to advance, while the country's Channel 12 television station had said that more active preparations, including the prepositioning of munitions, may now be underway. It is also worth noting that there have been persistent reports about possible Israeli strikes on Iran for some time, but that this actually came to pass on a more limited level last year. Authorities in Israel have also demonstrated a new willingness to launch overt attacks beyond the country's borders, in general. Preparations for an Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear facilities are said to be nearing completion, with the final steps, including the transfer of munitions and operational planning, currently ongoing, according to Channel 12. — OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) June 9, 2025 'Iran is acting much differently in negotiations than it did just days ago,' Trump said in an interview today with Fox News' Bret Baier. 'Much more aggressive. It's surprising to me. It's disappointing, but we are set to meet again tomorrow – we'll see.' Trump had told reporters that the next round of U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks was scheduled for Thursday during a question-and-answer session around an Invest America roundtable with multiple corporate CEOs at the White House yesterday. It is unclear whether or not this plan has changed. 'We have a meeting with Iran on Thursday. So we're going to wait till Thursday,' Trump had said. 'They're just asking for things that you can't do. They don't want to give up what they have to give up. You know what that is. They seek enrichment. We can't have enrichment. We want just the opposite.' US President Donald Trump told reporters that the next round of nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran will be held on Thursday, adding that Iran is demanding things "that you can't do." He noted that Tehran is insisting on uranium enrichment. — Rudaw English (@RudawEnglish) June 9, 2025 'And so far, they're not there. I hate to say that, because the alternative is a very, very dire one, but they're not there,' the U.S. president continued. 'They have given us their thoughts on the deal. I said, you know, it's just not acceptable.' 'We discussed a lot of things, and it went very well, very smooth. We'll see what happens. You know, we're trying to do something with a country we just spoke about, Iran,' Trump said at the same White House event yesterday in response to questions about a telephone conversation earlier in the day with Netanyahu. 'They [the Iranians] are good negotiators, but they're tough. Sometimes they can be too tough. That's the problem, we're trying to make a deal so that there's no destruction and death. And we've told them that, and I've told them that. I hope that's the way it works out, but it might not work out that way. We'll soon find out.' Trump response when he said the US officials have meeting with the Iranians on Thursday and that he discussed Lebanon with Netanyahu . — Hiba Nasr (@HibaNasr) June 9, 2025 Iran 'won't be enriching,' Trump had already told reporters this past weekend. 'If they enrich, then we're going to have to do it the other way.' Domestic Iranian capacity to enrich Uranium to a level of purity required to make effective nuclear weapons has long been a sticking point between Tehran and much of the international community. The U.S. Intelligence Community, among others, continues to assess that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program, but that the country has put itself in a position where it could build one within as little as a week if it chose to do so. The United States, Israel, and others, including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), have also accused Iran of lying, or at least being far less than forthcoming, about the full extent of its nuclear efforts to date. Signals from the Trump administration on the enrichment issue specifically have been mixed in recent weeks. Axios reported just last week that a proposed U.S. deal might allow Iran to continue enriching uranium to lower purity levels associated with civilian nuclear generation. A previous multi-national deal with Iran that the United States was party to, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), had also put limits on Iranian enrichment, but did not require it to be stopped outright. Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA in 2018 during his first term in office. Iran announced in 2020 that it was no longer abiding by any of the agreement's stipulations. For its part, Iran has stressed repeatedly that it is not willing to completely abandon its domestic enrichment efforts. Iranian authorities have also said they want a clear, formalized plan for relief from U.S. sanctions as part of any new nuclear agreement. 'The U.S. proposal is not acceptable to us. It was not the result of previous rounds of negotiations. We will present our own proposal to the other side via Oman after it is finalized. This proposal is reasonable, logical, and balanced,' Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said early today, according to Reuters. 'We must ensure before the lifting of sanctions that Iran will effectively benefit economically and that its banking and trade relations with other countries will return to normal.' 'Uranium enrichment is the key to our nuclear program and the enemies have focused on the enrichment,' Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also said last week during a televised address, again per Reuters. 'The proposal that the Americans have presented is 100% against our interests … The rude and arrogant leaders of America repeatedly demand that we should not have a nuclear programme. Who are you to decide whether Iran should have enrichment?' Majid Takht-e-Ravanchi, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs, also indicated yesterday that Iran could be looking to extend negotiations without necessarily outright rejecting a particular proposal. 'Our proposal is certainly not a one-sentence or one-paragraph text that can be easily dismissed,' Takht-e-Ravanchi explained in an interview with state-run IRNA. 'It contains elements that demonstrate our seriousness, show that our position has a defined framework, and indicate that we intend to work based on established principles. Our approach is logical.' 'The reality is that we are not discussing an excessively lengthy text at this stage because we do not intend to present a comprehensive, time-consuming agreement or understanding. The proposal we have submitted serves as a framework for an agreement. If there is mutual understanding regarding this framework, we can then begin more detailed negotiations on specific issues.' If U.S. negotiations with Iran do collapse, and American and/or Israeli attacks on nuclear facilities or other targets follow, it is unclear what the scale and scope of that operation might be, as already noted. The IDF has already demonstrated an ability to launch precision standoff strikes on Iran with virtual impunity in the past year, but only against targets on the surface. Israeli forces would face significantly greater challenges in neutralizing deeply buried sites tied to Iran's nuclear program. TWZ highlighted this reality after Israel announced its special operations forces had conducted a dramatic ground raid on an underground missile production facility in Syria last year. 'What member states decide to do is their prerogative,' IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi told The Jerusalem Post yesterday. 'I don't advise the Israeli government. They will decide what's best.' 'But one thing is certain,' he added, 'The [Iranian nuclear] program runs wide and deep. And when I say 'deep,' I mean it. Many of these facilities are extremely well-protected. Disrupting them would require overwhelming and devastating force.' This is where questions about U.S. participation typically come into the picture. America's armed forces have a unique conventional deep-penetrating strike capability in the form of B-2 Spirit stealth bombers armed with GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker buster bombs. TWZ highlighted the significance of this combination in reporting around the unusually large deployment of six B-2s to the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia between March and May of this year, as well as the use of those bombers in strikes on Yemen last October. In both cases, we also pointed out the clear strategic signalling aimed at Iran. The B-2 bombers on Diego Garcia represented just a portion of the additional U.S. forces and materiel that flowed into the Middle East since the beginning of the year. In addition, last week, reports began to emerge that the U.S. military had diverted counter-drone capabilities originally intended to be delivered to Ukraine to American forces in the Middle East. Like Israel, the U.S. military could also launch its own standoff strikes on Iran via other aircraft, as well as ships and submarines, but would face similar limitations in the kinds of targets it might be able to prosecute. Questions have even been raised in the past about whether some of Iran's underground nuclear facilities might be beyond the reach even of the MOP. Strikes that do not fully destroy facilities could still put them out of commission for at least a limited time. Ground raids could also be launched as part of what might be a protracted campaign. Any such operation would require a much larger force package beyond just the assets tasked with carrying out the strikes, including to suppress and destroy hostile air defenses, and would present additional risks as a result. U.S. operations targeting Iranian-backed Houthi militants in Yemen in the past year or so have highlighted how even more rudimentary air defenses can still present real threats to even advanced American aircraft, as you can read more about here. All of this would be further magnified by any need to mount a combat search and rescue effort to recover American personnel should their aircraft be downed inside Iran. The Houthis' arsenal of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as kamikaze drones, which the group has amassed with immense help from Iran, also underscores the dangers U.S. warships could face from Iranian retaliation. TWZ already explored the potential broader ramifications of a major conflict between the United States and Iran in detail earlier this year amid another spike in tensions between the two countries. Iran has long vowed to carry out a broad retaliatory response if its nuclear facilities are targeted. This could include missile and drone attacks on Israeli and U.S. interests across the Middle East on a scale and scope not seen ever before, as well as similar actions by proxy forces like the Houthis, along with terrorist attacks globally. 'We have a rule in CENTCOM: you improve your foxhole every single day,' Kurrila also said at today's hearing. Kurilla says an Israeli attack on Iran would increase the risks to safety of US troops in the region. 'We have a rule in CENTCOM: you improve your foxhole every single day.' — Jared Szuba (@JM_Szuba) June 10, 2025 Just this week, Iranian authorities explicitly threatened to strike Israeli nuclear sites if their own are targeted. This followed claims from Iran's intelligence minister, Esmail Khatib, that his country is in possession of a trove of secrets about Israel's unacknowledged nuclear arsenal, which he has also threatened to publicly release. This remains largely unconfirmed, but IAEA's Grossi has indicated that the information Iran has relates primarily to Israel's publicly acknowledged Soreq nuclear research facility. It's also worth noting that Iran's general ability to threaten missile and drone attacks on targets further away from its shores has steadily grown in recent years. The U.S. Air Force's deployment in May of a contingent of F-15E Strike Eagle combat jets to provide force protection on Diego Garcia, which TWZ was first to report, highlights this fact. The island, where a force of a B-52 bombers also remains forward-deployed, has historically been seen as being less vulnerable, especially to smaller potential adversaries like Iran, simply due to its remoteness. Grossi, among others, has also warned that attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities could prompt the country to start an active nuclear weapons program. The U.S. Intelligence Community has publicly assessed that Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei is already under increasing pressure from domestic hardliners to do so. There is clear potential for other second-order impacts, as well. Iranian authorities have threatened the possibility of blockading the Strait of Hormuz, which links the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, in times of heightened tensions in the past. Doing so would have major impacts on global oil and natural gas supplies. Yemen's Houthis have already massively disrupted international shipping with attacks on commercial vessels in and around the Red Sea in the past year or so. Regional and global impacts could draw in other countries and create additional complexities. Russia and China, for instance, have deep ties to Iran and interests in keeping the current regime in Tehran in place. All told, it remains to be seen whether the United States and/or Israel will launch attacks on Iran, including its nuclear sites. At the same time, that decision looks to heavily hinge on the increasingly uncertain future of ongoing U.S.-Iranian negotiations. Contact the author: joe@
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Trump plans to punish Newsom
The Trump administration is considering cutting California's federal education funding, as a tit-for-tat battle with Gavin Newsom, the state's governor, reaches boiling point. Donald Trump has repeatedly suggested Mr Newsom should be arrested for his 'bad job' in handling a wave of anti-deportation protests, which erupted on Friday in response to immigration raids. It comes as Mr Newsom on Tuesday accused Mr Trump of a 'brazen abuse of power' when he deployed thousands of National Guard troops and 700 US marines in Los Angeles to quell the protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids. The state is suing the president for sending in troops without Mr Newsom's approval, marking the first time since civil rights protests in 1965 that a president sent the National Guard to deal with civil unrest without cooperation from the state's governor. Kush Desai, a White House spokesman, said the administration is 'committed to ending this nightmare and restoring the California Dream'. He added: 'No final decisions, however, on any potential future action by the administration have been made.' In the wake of the row, White House officials may stop the education department's disbursement of 'formula funds' to California, Politico reported. The state receives $8 billion a year from the education department. Some of the payouts are used towards programs for students with disabilities and from low-income homes. Mr Trump's vow to cut funding to the country's most populous state began before his latest clash with Mr Newsom and his dispatch of Marines and the National Guard. He has already cut $126.4 million in flood prevention projects, and threatened to dilute California's tough vehicle emissions standards. Last month, he said he would halt federal funding after a transgender athlete took part in a sporting event. His pause to visas for students from China would also have an outsized impact on California as it enrols more foreign students than any other state. As the state was ravaged by a series of wildfires in January, Mr Trump directly blamed Mr Newsom for LA's struggling water supply, and threatened to bar California from accepting federal disaster funds unless they changed water policies. Speaking on Tuesday, Mr Trump described the LA protesters as 'a foreign enemy' and vowed to 'liberate' Los Angeles. A curfew has been enforced between 8pm to 6am in the downtown area of central Los Angeles, in what officials say is necessary to stop vandalism and looting. Mr Newsom has urged demonstrators – who have been protesting ICE raids since Friday – to remain peaceful and said Mr Trump's actions were fulfilling 'the deranged fantasy of a dictatorial president' . 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.
