Labour MPs set up group to focus on Reform UK threat
The informal caucus, which is understood to have been meeting on a regular basis in Parliament, includes members from seats where Reform came second in 2024's general election.
One red-wall MP who is a member of the group told the PA news agency that a key area of concern was that Chancellor Rachel Reeves' push for economic growth has been focused too heavily on wealthier areas in the south.
Labour MPs are rightly concerned about Nigel Farage's plans to make people pay to access NHS services and will carry on taking the fight to them and other opposition parties in parliament and at the ballot box
Labour source
Pointing to her announcement of funding for transport links between Oxford and Cambridge as well as backing for the expansion of Heathrow Airport, they said: 'That has no effect whatsoever on the red wall.
'It's not going to create growth in the forgotten areas where Reform are more likely to be second.'
They are calling for more investment in transport and infrastructure in the North of England, where Reform outperformed the Tories in dozens of seats.
It is understood the aim of the group is to identify ways to better promote Labour's work on areas like migration and crime amid concerns in some quarters that the Government's political messaging is not cutting through.
Reform returned just five MPs at the election last year but came second place in 98 constituencies, including 89 Labour seats.
Concerns within Labour ranks about the rise of the right-wing party have mounted after it edged ahead in national polls for the first time, with 26% of the vote in a Find Out Now survey in January.
Reform also topped a YouGov poll this week at 25%, with Labour on 24% and the Conservatives at 21%, though its one-point lead is well within the margin of error.
Downing Street is also carrying out targeted work to counter the threat, with the Guardian reporting that data and strategy experts have been enlisted to advise MPs on the kinds of messages resonating with Reform-minded voters.
A Labour source said: 'Groups of MPs meet all the time about lots of different issues. Labour MPs are rightly concerned about Nigel Farage's plans to make people pay to access NHS services and will carry on taking the fight to them and other opposition parties in parliament and at the ballot box.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Inheritance tax proposals would make UK ‘dangerous place' for wealthy
Treasury proposals to stop parents from making unlimited tax-free gifts to their children would make the UK a 'dangerous place' for wealthy people to live, tax experts have warned. Government officials are said to be examining proposals that would tighten the rules on the gifting of money and assets in an attempt to close the black hole in government finances at the autumn budget. The move has been attacked by the Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, who claimed Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, wanted to tax 'what you leave your children … all to pay for [her] failures'. • How an inheritance tax raid could work — and what you can do about it Richard Tice, Nigel Farage's deputy, promised Reform UK would abolish a tax that caused 'unnecessary pain to grieving families' and 'disincentivises hard work, ambition and risk-taking'. Dan Neidle, the founder of Tax Policy Associates, said while a raid on inheritance tax might be a good idea in theory, Reeves was highly unlikely to adopt it amid concerns that it would further discourage wealthy people from living in the UK. 'The changes to inheritance tax rules and non-dom status at the last budget have already sent quite a damaging message to wealthy people and there is a big risk that Labour suffers a death by a thousand cuts on the rich who have the ability to leave the UK,' he said. 'You would be saying to non-doms that not only do you have to pay inheritance tax — as announced in Reeves's last budget — but you can't even gift your way out of it. It would make the UK a very dangerous place for a wealthy person to be'. Neidle added that the move would also not necessarily help Reeves balance the books as it would be almost impossible for the Office for Budget Responsibility to accurately assess how much such a new tax might raise. 'No one knows how much people are gifting currently so there is no way that you could calculate how much the tax might theoretically raise,' he said. 'And if there is one thing the Treasury hates, it is not knowing the impact of tax changes.' David Sturrock, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said that Reeves was unlikely to be able to raise significant sums from inheritance tax without hitting small gifts made by middle earners. The Treasury is looking at the possibility of tightening rules that taper away inheritance tax liabilities on gifts made within seven years before a death, but Sturrock said there 'isn't a large amount of revenues coming in from gifts within that period. I don't think that is going to be a big revenue raiser'. A lifetime cap on tax-free gifts is also said to be under consideration. Sturrock said this would also have to be set very low to bring in large amounts, pointing to evidence that 90 per cent of the £14 billion in gifts made each year were below £20,000. 'It's going to have to be a number in the small thousands if you want to start bringing in substantial amounts of revenue,' he said. 'In a large majority of cases these gifts are being used to buy houses, it's help with a deposit. Those are more often received by those with wealthier parents, but it is still some 'ordinary' people too. [A cap] might be a way of preventing lifetime gifting to avoid some elements of inheritance tax, but it doesn't seem like it's going to raise game-changing sums unless you drastically expand the scope of gifts that are going to be taxed.' Badenoch said that Labour 'want your savings, your pension, your home and now what you leave your children', arguing for cutting spending rather than raising taxes. Tice confirmed his party was still committed to abolishing inheritance tax completely, a move which would cost an estimated £14 billion by the end of the parliament. 'Inheritance tax does little more than add extra unnecessary pain to grieving families. It disincentivises hard work, ambition and risk-taking, so it's no wonder this Labour government are such big fans of it,' he said. 'Reform UK would abolish this death tax, ensuring people are rewarded for their hard work and putting more money into the pockets of families.'
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reform ‘could wipe out the Blob at a stroke'
Reform UK could wipe out the so-called Blob 'at a stroke' if it won power, a former Cabinet secretary has said. Lord Case said Nigel Farage could rapidly remove the 'obstacles' clogging up the Civil Service if he did his 'homework' on government reform. The former mandarin, who served five prime ministers during his time in No 10, has previously said Mr Farage should be invited for talks with civil servants to help him prepare for government. In a new interview with The Spectator, he said he could envisage Reform unblocking the machinery of Whitehall in one fell swoop if it won the next election. It is something Labour is vying to achieve, with Sir Keir Starmer vowing to tackle the 'over-cautious and flabby' state with wholesale reform of the Civil Service. Speaking about Reform's prospects, Lord Case said: 'If they did their homework, you could remove all of those obstacles at a stroke. It's not just the top things, like scrapping the Office for Budget Responsibility, but here are all the people who can block planning applications for motorways or power stations. 'Here are all the statutory consultees every time you launch a new business support programme.' Reform has pledged to use its new-found power on local councils to save taxpayers' money by cracking down on waste and bureaucracy, with a focus on net zero and working from home. It has led to a string of Reform recruits butting heads with the officials helping to run the party's new town halls, prompting some frustrated staff to resign. George Finch, the teenage leader of Warwickshire county council, clashed with his chief executive over a Pride flag, while Luke Campbell, the new mayor of Hull and East Yorkshire, has become embroiled in a battle with his own staff. In an interview with The Spectator, Mr Finch said he was told shortly after his election that his councillors would have to fall in line. He claimed the council's chief executive told him: 'I know you're trying to get rid of me… Well, you can't get rid of me. The way it works around here is your councillors play ball.' The 19-year-old allegedly replied: 'Are you joking? You have to work with us. It's not the other way around. We've been put here by the electorate. You haven't.' He compared rows over diversity, equity and inclusion and net zero to the satirical TV show Yes Minister, claiming officials told him: 'Are you sure this is what you want to do? Voters might not like it.' Warwickshire county council declined to respond to the claims, according to The Spectator. Lord Case advised Mr Farage not to assume that the lessons from local government could be transposed directly onto Westminster. Instead, he urged him to invest time in researching 'what is wrong with government' before attempting to overturn the systems in Whitehall. He said: 'Politicians across the political spectrum are united in their frustration that the British system isn't delivering. The really interesting question for Reform is will they do the homework required to understand immediately the changes they need to make in how government works? 'Nigel Farage probably never spends time at the Institute for Government – but read what the IfG says about what is wrong with government, what is wrong with the bureaucracy and the laws that have put unaccountable officials in charge of things instead of politicians.' The Telegraph revealed that thousands more civil servants have been appointed in the past year despite Sir Keir's pledge to fight the 'flabby' state. The Cabinet Office, headed by Pat McFadden, a key proponent of slimming down the Civil Service, announced in April that 2,100 of its jobs would be cut or moved to other parts of the Government in the next two years. But in 2024 the department hired an additional 760 civil servants, more than a third of the number of roles they have said they will cut in the next 24 months.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Rachel Reeves risk repeating a mistake if she changes inheritance tax
Whenever a government is desperate to raise funds, there is a good chance it will revisit mad and bad ideas before trying something that is proven to work. As Rachel Reeves stares at the prospect of a black hole in the public finances — ranging from £20 billion to £70 billion, according to various estimates — it is clear that the chancellor cannot dig down the back of the sofa to plug the gap at the next budget. If these estimates are to be believed, dramatic spending cuts or big tax rises will be required to keep within her fiscal rules. Some Labour figures have duly called for a wealth tax, to squeeze the pips out of the country's richest who are already fleeing in rising numbers. Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, is said to have privately urged Ms Reeves to clamp down on the rich; Lord Kinnock, the former party leader, has done so publicly. Thankfully this unwise idea has been dismissed as 'daft' by Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, which hopefully means it has been discarded. Yet another such bad idea has floated into the public domain: reworking inheritance tax. Reports suggest that Treasury officials have been tasked with examining how assets are being given away before death to reduce liabilities. Under current rules, gifts made seven years or more before someone's death are not captured by inheritance tax. Any gifts handed over after that are taxed at varying rates. The Treasury is said to be examining whether a lifetime cap should be introduced and whether the so-called 'taper rates' on gifts given up to seven years beforehand need to be reworked. It is unclear whether these ideas have yet to reach the chancellor's desk. • Angela Rayner gives Labour a 12-month mission to save itself Were Ms Reeves to pursue changes to inheritance tax, it would represent the apotheosis of the Starmer government's all-pain, no-gain approach to governing. First, changing the rules on inheritance tax would not raise the projected £40 billion required to plug the gap in the public finances. Families would simply find workarounds to avoid strenuous new levies, just as they have done under the present regime. There is a risk that the government would go to great effort to craft new inheritance tax rules, only to find that it fails to deliver what was hoped for and it is back to square one. Second, it is political suicide. There are few issues more likely to incite fury among the electorate than a stricter inheritance tax regime. Swathes of middle England who have carefully accrued capital will punish any party that seeks to take it away. Gordon Brown realised this when mulling over calling an election in 2007, taking fright from the Conservative's plans to raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million. And finally, it is morally wrong. Inheritance tax is a levy on those who have worked hard throughout their lives to earn something to pass onto the next generation. The chancellor must draw a line under this speculation, which will prove damaging to her personally the longer it continues. There are better options available, such as tackling the ballooning welfare bill, with spending on disability benefits set to reach £100 billion by the end of the decade. There is also the dire state of productivity in the public sector, which is costing the economy £80 billion a year, as this newspaper reported yesterday. After £40 billion of tax rises in her first budget suffocated economic growth, Ms Reeves would be wise to learn and not repeat the same error.
