logo
The Labour right wants Wes Streeting in No 10. Why? What does he really stand for?

The Labour right wants Wes Streeting in No 10. Why? What does he really stand for?

The Guardian16 hours ago
Just over a year after Keir Starmer entered Downing Street, his political survival already looks uncertain. Perennially indecisive, unpopular with the public and unable to pass major legislation without rebellions, the prime minister has reportedly been put 'on notice' by senior figures within his party. Speculation about a potential successor is mounting.
What would Labour's dominant faction – the neo-Blairite right – look for in a candidate? Their best bet would be an effective operator who doesn't carry too much political baggage, a decent communicator, free of Starmer's stumbling reticence, and a committed partisan of their cause: namely the free market and a strong state. They need someone who will go on the offensive for these values, rather than offering the bland apologetics that we have seen from the incumbent.
Few fit the bill better than the health secretary, Wes Streeting, who has made no secret of his ambition to lead the country and appears to have spent years laying the groundwork with media rounds, donor events and backroom conversations. When Starmer's leadership of the Labour party was on the brink during the Beergate scandal, Peter Mandelson is said to have canvassed the Labour frontbench to anoint Streeting. 'In the longer term,' briefed one party source, 'Wes is their guy, not Keir.'
Born into a working-class east London family in 1983, Streeting has been fairly consistent in both his political style and outlook since he was in his early 20s. A pugnacious advocate of private enterprise, and an effective behind-the-scenes operator, his deft handling of the press allows him to stride into the limelight at crucial moments, with memorable one-liners that seem crafted to enrage his opponents. As president of the National Union of Students (NUS) in the twilight of the New Labour era, he inveighed against lecturers' strikes, remarking that 'students need industrial action by university staff like a hole in the head'. He also broke with dominant student opinion by supporting tuition fees and criticising Palestine solidarity protests.
From the NUS it was only a small step to parliament, where Streeting landed in 2015. The words 'future leader' were immediately 'appended to his name like a Homeric epithet', according to one insider account. He vigorously opposed the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, repeatedly excoriating him in parliamentary meetings and working with the People's Vote campaign to chip away at his resistance to a second Brexit referendum. This earned him a place in Starmer's shadow cabinet once the right had regained control five years later. There, he made no bones about accepting hundreds of thousands of pounds from donors linked to the private healthcare industry. He insisted that the party needed to get tough on 'law and order' along with 'defence and national security'; and he signalled a clear shift from the foreign policy of the Corbyn era by visiting Israel and meeting with ministers in its government.
Now that Streeting is at the helm of the NHS, we are beginning to see how his hypothetical prime ministership might play out. Shortly after the last general election, he sketched out his vision for the health service in the pages of the Sun, writing that 'major surgery' was needed to make it 'fit for the future': moving treatment out of hospitals, so as to focus on local care and prevention. This could not be achieved through public spending, Streeting warned, because 'the money isn't there'. It could only be done through hard-knuckled 'reform'.
True to his word, Streeting has helped to normalise the state of perma-austerity at the health department, which will receive only an extra 2.8% annually in real terms over the coming years: less than the long-term historical norm of 3.7%, and far below the average increase of 6.8% under New Labour. This is nowhere near enough to solve the perpetual crisis in the sector, let alone make any real improvements in the quality of care.
Without meaningful investment, the levers that Streeting can pull to realise his goals are limited. There is reorganisation through measures such as the summary abolition of NHS England and mass job cuts. There is techno-optimism, allowing AI companies such as Palantir to run parts of the ailing service. And, most importantly, there is privatisation.
Streeting has been working hard to ensure that 'more treatments can be delivered through the independent sector', as an official briefing put it. Under his watch, an even greater portion of the NHS – including, potentially, sensitive patient data – is being handed over to profit-making companies. His plan to set up 300 'neighbourhood health hubs' is powered by corporate finance, in what is shaping up to be a frame-by-frame replay of the disastrous PFI initiatives of the 2000s. Research shows that the effect of these policies is to worsen health inequality. But this does not seem to concern the minister.
Bullish as ever, Streeting has said he is 'up for the fight' that his plan will provoke. And that is what he now has. In recent weeks, resident doctors rejected his notion that 'reform' alone will magically resolve the service's deep-rooted problems of under-resourcing and understaffing. They refused to accept a pay deal that would amount to a 21% reduction in their salaries since 2008, and instead made a principled case for wage restoration. Streeting was intransigent. During the resulting five-day strike he launched a series of broadsides against the workers, insisting that they must feel the 'pain' of the walkouts and vowing that they would 'lose a war with this government'. Much like his 'bullet in the head' rhetoric, the remarks showed that Streeting's main interest is in positioning himself as a crusader on behalf of the establishment rather than fixing the service he oversees. He is also keenly aware of the populist appeal of his rhetoric at a time when support for the doctors' struggle is in decline.
Sign up to First Edition
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
The other front on which Streeting has been fighting is the culture war. He has imposed a permanent ban on puberty blockers for trans children – despite a wealth of dissenting expert opinion including that of the British Medical Association, which disputes the scientific basis of the prohibition – and he has also barred those under 18 from changing gender markers on their NHS records, potentially making it more difficult for them to access vital services.
The irony, of course, is that while Streeting styles himself as the man to beat Nigel Farage, his politics is one of deference to big business, clampdowns on trans rights and incendiary rhetoric to provoke the left. These features are more typically associated with reactionary populism than with social democracy. Streeting's ascent reflects the fact that, in today's Labour party, the former is cannibalising the latter.
Oliver Eagleton is an associate editor at the New Left Review and author of The Starmer Project: A Journey to the Right
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Hospitality horror show: Four in five firms hike prices after Budget tax blow with 84,000 jobs lost as half axe staff
Hospitality horror show: Four in five firms hike prices after Budget tax blow with 84,000 jobs lost as half axe staff

Daily Mail​

time19 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Hospitality horror show: Four in five firms hike prices after Budget tax blow with 84,000 jobs lost as half axe staff

Most hospitality businesses have raised their prices and more than half have cut jobs as they reel from Rachel Reeves' tax onslaught. In a report that lays bare the impact of Labour's policies, the Chancellor was warned almost four-fifths of pubs, restaurants and bars have hiked prices to deal with extra costs. The survey by trade bodies led by UK Hospitality also found 51 per cent of venues have slashed staff with 84,000 hospitality jobs lost since Reeves' first Budget last October. The report warned businesses have been forced into 'impossible decisions' due to 'unsustainable' tax hikes. The industry is calling for radical tax changes in the upcoming autumn Budget in order to reverse a damaging wave of venue closures. The calls came as official figures showed another 307 hospitality firms collapsed in June – the highest level since November 2024 in the wake of the Budget. Saxon Moseley, a partner at consulting firm RSM UK, said: 'Insolvencies continue to creep up which is a worrying, but not unexpected trend. 'The hospitality industry has been acutely hit with higher staff costs and rising inflation, and when you overlay subdued sales, continuing to operate has become unviable for some. 'With many operators still in survival mode, the industry is struggling and as a key job creator, particularly for younger workers, a fragile hospitality industry presents an economic headache for the UK.' Hospitality, which includes hotels and cafes as well as bars and restaurants, saw costs rise by £3.4billion after the Budget as they faced higher National insurance contributions, an inflation-busting rise in the minimum wage and increases to punitive business rates. With the economy stuttering and a black hole opening up in Reeves' Budget plans, further tax hikes look likely this autumn. Experts warn this will only make matters worse, however, with figures this week showing eight pubs have closed every week so far this year. In a desperate plea, UK Hospitality has joined forces with the British Institute of Innkeeping, the British Beer & Pub Association and Hospitality Ulster to call for help in the upcoming Budget. The trade bodies together said: 'Unsustainable tax increases are squeezing businesses, stifling growth and investment, and threatening local employment, especially for young people.' Echoing calls for respite at the Budget, RSM's Moseley said: 'Taking steps to overhaul the business rates system, plus supporting the industry to respond to recent tax increases would allow operators to not only weather the storm, but invest in jobs for the future.' Business rates are a local levy based on the value of a commercial property. The hospitality industry was hit by a £500million increase in business rates in April alongside the barrage of other costs imposed by Labour. Before the Budget, small businesses had called for a Covid-era discount of 75 per cent to be extended to give them some breathing space. But Labour reduced this to a 40 per cent discount, capped at £110,000 per pub.

Rural taxpayers set to contribute ‘unfair' levels of funding for urban-area services
Rural taxpayers set to contribute ‘unfair' levels of funding for urban-area services

The Independent

time20 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Rural taxpayers set to contribute ‘unfair' levels of funding for urban-area services

The government have been warned that people in rural areas who pay council tax will contribute 'unfair' levels of funding for services. Councils councils say that money will be used for urban communities under proposed government reforms. Large rural authorities have also highlighted that maximum council tax increases will be needed to deliver necessary core budget increases for essential services over the next three years. Although, in its submission to the government's consultation on planned reforms, known as the 'fair funding review 2.0', the County Councils Network (CCN) said the proposals were 'better than feared'. The network welcomed some elements that determine funding levels, such as an indicator for remoteness and a new formula for social care and school transport allocations, which it said 'better recognise the needs' of the 38 county areas. But CCN called on the government to reconsider its broader approach, insisting the proposals 'place a disproportionate burden on council taxpayers in county areas to fund local services and redistribute funding to urban areas'. Modelling showed that under the proposals £1.6 billion in council tax income generated in county areas will be redistributed across the country. This is due to a decision by ministers to include 100 per cent of local council tax receipts when allocating funds in a bid to 'equalise' revenue across the sector, in a departure from the previous approach which took in 85 per cent. CCN said this means 32 of the 38 county and rural authorities will lose an additional £400 million in a process that would represent an 'overwhelming' benefit for urban metropolitan boroughs. The analysis showed 22 authorities will receive increases in direct government funding totalling £845 million under the plans. But on average these councils will receive 70 per cent of their overall increase in core spending power, the official measure of funding available for services, from council tax rises specifically. In addition, 16 other councils, including some located in the North and the Midlands, will experience funding cuts totalling £470 million. With no increase in direct government funding, the entire increase in core spending power for these authorities will come from council tax rises, CCN said. 'One third of council tax income raised in these areas over the three-year period is needed to offset cuts to funding and prevent them falling below a proposed 0 per cent funding floor,' the network added. Across all 38 county and rural unitary councils, direct grant funding will increase by £374 million, with 90 per cent of the total uplift in core spending power coming via maximum 5 per cent annual council tax rises. The modelling suggests this scenario is in stark contrast to the impact on councils in urban areas, with nearly 50 per cent of metropolitan authorities' extra resources coming from additional grant funding of £1.2 billion over three years. Overall, in the absence of maximum annual council tax rises over the period, the analysis showed 33 of the 38 county and rural unitary authorities would experience a real-terms reduction in funding, CCN said. The new government grant would fund just 9 per cent of the estimated £4.4 billion increase in the cost of providing services in county and rural areas over three years, while the boost in Government funding for metropolitan authorities would fund half of the total £2.4 billion increase in estimated costs of services in those areas. CCN said it is 'simply unrealistic' to expect some of England's largest social care councils to 'provide life critical services while receiving deep cuts in government grant' and called for 'significantly' more funding to prevent 'unsustainable cuts'. Chairman of the CCN Tim Oliver said: 'Some 16 county and rural councils across the length and breadth of the country will see reductions in grant funding, while the government's proposals place a disproportionate burden on council taxpayers in county areas to fund local services and redistribute funding to urban areas. 'Those facing cuts in government funding will inevitably have to reduce vital frontline services, while the reliance on council tax rises leaves even those with modest funding increases facing an extremely challenging funding outlook. 'While we recognise the need to take account of how much councils raise in local taxation, the government's proposals to fully equalise unfairly redistribute hundreds of millions of local council tax to other areas, while weakening the incentive to build homes.' Sir Stephen Houghton, chairman of the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities, backed the government's approach. He said: 'It is absolutely right that any new funding system must fully reflect the wide disparities in councils' ability to raise income through council tax. 'The failure to do so over the past decade has led to disproportionately deep cuts in the most deprived areas, worsening inequality across the country.' The government's consultation on the reforms closed on Friday. A Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: 'We do not recognise the (CCN) analysis. The current, outdated way in which local authorities are funded has left communities behind and damaged local services. 'This must change and is why we are taking decisive action as part of our Plan for Change to reform the funding system so we can improve public services, while maintaining the previous government's referendum threshold on council tax rises so taxpayers have the final say and are protected from excessive increases.' Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said: 'Yet again the Labour government are showing utter contempt for people living in rural Britain. 'The family farms tax has been devastating for British farming and scrapping the rural services grant has put rural councils under enormous pressure. Now this latest spiteful change will steal more money out of the hands of county councils and send it straight into Labour-run urban areas. 'Only the Conservatives are serious about standing up for our rural communities' Liberal Democrat local government spokeswoman Vikki Slade said the reforms could be severely detrimental to some areas. Ms Slade said: 'Councils across the country are already teetering on the edge after years of Conservatives' neglect of local funding and services – from bus services cuts in rural areas to the rising costs of social care. These ill-thought-out reforms only risk leaving parts of the country significantly worse off. 'To truly help local authorities, the government should urgently look at supporting councils who receive the least grant funding and those that face additional pressure on services in rural and coastal areas, to help them with spiralling costs.'

Labour's migrant hotels policy dealt major blow after council WINS battle to stop asylum seekers being housed there
Labour's migrant hotels policy dealt major blow after council WINS battle to stop asylum seekers being housed there

The Sun

time21 minutes ago

  • The Sun

Labour's migrant hotels policy dealt major blow after council WINS battle to stop asylum seekers being housed there

ASYLUM seekers will be kicked out of a flashpoint hotel after a council yesterday won a court battle to ban them living there. The decision is a huge blow to the ­Government's policy of housing migrants in hotels. 4 4 4 A High Court judge ruled the move to accommodate the migrants over paying customers at The Bell Hotel may breach planning rules. Epping Forest District Council launched the legal challenge after protests erupted in recent weeks. Public anger grew after a migrant living at the hotel in Epping, Essex, was charged with sexual assault. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said the ruling throws Labour's asylum policy into chaos. 'Plans thrown into chaos' Other councils are now poised to launch their own legal challenges to the Home Office scheme. Twelve hotels located in areas where Reform UK has a majority are understood to be planning their own court battles. Corina Gander, Tory leader of Broxbourne Borough Council, Herts, said the decision had set a 'massive precedent' and boosted their efforts to close a migrant hotel. Yesterday's temporary injunction, subject to appeal, means everyone being put up at The Bell must leave before September 12, with a hearing to decide whether to make it permanent later in the year. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's 11th-hour bid to get the case dismissed was refused by the judge. A lawyer for the Home Office warned the decision would 'substantially impact' its ability to house asylum seekers in hotels. Edward Brown KC also said it 'runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further violent protests'. Border security minister Angela Eagle said the Government aimed to close all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament. She said: 'We will continue working with local authorities to address legitimate concerns. 'We will carefully consider this judgment.' Mr Philp said: 'This throws asylum accommodation plans into chaos. "Many councils will now follow Epping's lead and take legal action to avoid hundreds of young male illegal immigrants being housed in the middle of their communities. All things being equal, The Bell will be empty by September 12, and that's really important for Epping Forest. Philip Coppel KC 'We now know many crimes including rapes and sexual assaults have been committed by illegal immigrants in asylum hotels, and many local councils will want to protect their residents from this.' After a hearing in London's High Court last week, Mr Justice Eyre said Somani Hotels Limited, owners of The Bell Hotel, had 'sidestepped public scrutiny' by not applying for planning permission to convert it to migrant use. In his judgment, he said that while the council in Epping had not 'definitively established' Somani Hotels had breached planning rules, 'the strength of the claimant's case is such that it weighs in favour' of granting the injunction. He also said the fear of crime being committed by migrants was a 'relevant factor' and it is 'understandable' that recent arrests 'form a basis for the local concern'. 4 Philip Coppel KC, for the local authority, said the situation was 'wholly unacceptable' and provided a 'feeding ground for unrest'. He added: 'There has been what can be described as an increase in community tension, the catalyst of which has been the use of The Bell Hotel to place asylum seekers. 'It is not the asylum seekers who are acting unlawfully. 'It is the defendant, by allowing the hotel to be used to house asylum seekers. 'It really could not be much worse than this.' Council leader Chris Whitbread hailed the judgement. Outside the Royal Courts of Justice, he said: 'All things being equal, The Bell will be empty by September 12, and that's really important for Epping Forest. 'The Government have to address the bigger issue of the illegal asylum problem, but in Epping Forest we will stand up for our residents.' Mr Whitbread also urged locals not to gloat. He said: 'Don't protest. 'This is the beginning, not the end.' This community stood up bravely, despite being slandered as far-right, and have won. Nigel Farage Reform UK leader Nigel Farage called it 'a victory for the parents and concerned residents of Epping'. He said: 'This community stood up bravely, despite being slandered as far-right, and have won. 'They represent the vast majority of decent people in this country. 'Young, undocumented males who break into the UK illegally should not be free to walk the streets anywhere. 'They must be detained and deported. 'I hope that Epping provides inspiration to others.' Piers Riley-Smith, for Somani Hotels, said that 'disagreement with Government policy' did not justify an injunction. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch hailed the ruling as a 'victory for mums and dads'. She said of the migrants: 'They need to be moved out immediately. 'Bring back a proper deterrent and remove all illegal arrivals immediately, so towns like Epping never have to deal with this again.' In 2023, Great Yarmouth Borough Council won an injunction preventing hotels along its seafront from being used to house asylum seekers. FLAGS FURORE By Julia Atherley SIX white mini-roundabouts have been daubed with red crosses to make them look like St George's flags, sparking a police probe. Cops are treating the incidents in parts of Birmingham and in Bromsgrove, Worcs, as criminal damage. It comes after Birmingham Council and Tower Hamlets in East London took down England and Union flags from lamp-posts despite backing the flying of pro-Palestine flags. One Brummie said: 'There's a real sense that people who are proud to be British are being made to feel ashamed of their patriotism.' The Union Jack and St George's flags have been raised nationwide as part of an online movement called Operation Raise the Colours.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store