logo
Nigel Farage promises a lot – but do Reform's sums add up?

Nigel Farage promises a lot – but do Reform's sums add up?

Telegraph27-05-2025
Nigel Farage was in giveaway mode on Tuesday as he promised a Reform UK government would nearly double the personal income tax allowance, restore winter fuel support for pensioners and scrap the two-child benefit cap.
The policies are appealing to voters, but are they affordable? Farage admitted people would be ' lined up in droves ' to ask how, or even if, his party could bankroll such policies.
If Farage were prime minister, the promise to increase the personal income tax allowance from £12,570 to £20,000 a year would alone force him to find anything from £50bn to £80bn, the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) estimates.
Benefits giveaways would add billions on top of that. Scrapping the two-child benefit cap would cost £3.4bn a year, the IFS has estimated, while restoring the winter fuel allowance would cost around £1.5bn per year. A promise of a transferable tax allowance for married couples hasn't been costed.
Farage has repeatedly attacked the Starmer Government for being 'hopelessly adrift' on public debt, which is hovering at about 95pc of GDP. He therefore wouldn't be borrowing his way towards honouring his pledges if he moved into Downing Street.
Instead, the Reform UK leader has promised 'big savings'. 'Big' is no exaggeration. At the lower end of the IFS estimated cost of the income tax change alone, he's looking for savings equivalent to the Government's annual spending on defence, or on the entire disability and child benefit system. At the £80bn top end, it's more than the Government spends on schools each year, or, to take another measure, almost half the central government payroll.
He probably isn't going to sack every second civil servant on day one. So how will he pull off the feat of balancing the books, when it has eluded governments of the Left and Right for decades?
Farage has promised full details next year. In the meantime, his downpayment is a claim that ' scrapping net zero ' would save £45bn a year – a 50pc increase on the £30bn estimate that Reform MP Richard Tice floated as recently as two weeks ago.
Ripping up public-sector diversity initiatives would yield another £7bn a year, which sounds as vague as it is optimistic.
The traditional bonfire of the quangos will reap £13bn a year. Asylum seeker hotels would also go, which Reform says will yield £4bn a year despite the fact National Audit Office figures suggest the party might claw back less than half of that.
In an interview with The Telegraph last week, Tice acknowledged that a Reform UK government taking office in 2029 would need a much clearer set of plans than this. 'These are the tax cuts I want to get to,' he said. 'But we can't implement them until I've proven that I can produce the savings.'
Those comments came after stockbroking firm Panmure Liberum said the £80bn funding gap – which it had identified even before this week's fresh promises – could trigger an 'immediate and violent' sterling crisis, reminiscent of the market meltdown after Liz Truss's mini-Budget.
Labour also invoked the spirit of Truss on Tuesday, with party chairman Ellie Reeves saying Farage's 'tens of billions of pounds of fantasy promises … are exactly how Liz Truss crashed the economy'.
Unlike the impatient Truss, though, Farage seems ready to play a longer game. And he'll need to. As IFS deputy director Helen Miller said on Tuesday, cuts of the magnitude he envisions can't be achieved by scrapping the odd superfluous quango or diversity programme, as Farage seems to suggest.
Instead, it requires a 'debate ... about the vision of the state and what role the government should play in coming years,' she said.
In other words, Farage may theoretically be able to make the sums add up on his slate of policy promises but only if the state cuts back on, or even drops, huge amounts of what it does.
This is a debate that Tice, at least, seems up for. In an article for The Telegraph last week, he was even prepared to take on the Westminster shibboleth that the NHS must remain untainted by the private sector.
A tax break would encourage wealthier people to go private, he said, and the NHS should buy 'millions more' appointments from private healthcare providers. These appointments would still be provided free to NHS patients, so they would come at a cost to taxpayers.
Tice's bet must be that the private sector would get bigger and more efficient as a result, making the service cheaper overall.
Clearly, much more detail is needed. It may be hard, in many quarters, for Farage and Tice to get a hearing for any plan to fundamentally rewire the British state – if they come up with one. But it's a debate Labour should welcome, rather than seek to smother.
Chancellor Rachel Reeves is boxed in, and constantly at risk of running out of fiscal headroom. If there is a politically palatable path to disrupting the fiscal status quo, she hasn't found it yet either.
Farage says that what he offers is a chance to think differently. 'We're not ideologically tied to the same ideas upon which we believe the Conservative and Labour governments have gone so wrong over the course of the last few years,' as he put it.
Reform UK wants to embrace a low-tax and high-benefit society, combining two positions that have traditionally been diametrically opposed in Britain.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

MP removed from New Zealand parliament in heated debate over Palestinian recognition
MP removed from New Zealand parliament in heated debate over Palestinian recognition

The Guardian

time21 minutes ago

  • The Guardian

MP removed from New Zealand parliament in heated debate over Palestinian recognition

New Zealand parliamentarian Chlöe Swarbrick was ordered to leave parliament on Tuesday during a heated debate over the government's response to the conflict in Gaza. An urgent debate was called after the centre-right government said on Monday it was weighing up its position on whether to recognise a Palestinian state. Close ally Australia on Monday joined Canada, the UK and France in announcing it would recognise a Palestinian state at a UN conference in September. Swarbrick, who is co-leader of the Green party, said New Zealand was a 'laggard' and an 'outlier' and the lack of decision was appalling, before calling on some government members to support a bill to 'sanction Israel for its war crimes'. The bill was proposed by her party in March and is supported by all opposition parties. 'If we find six of 68 government MPs with a spine, we can stand on the right side of history,' said Swarbrick. Speaker Gerry Brownlee said that statement was 'completely unacceptable' and that she had to withdraw it and apologise. When she refused, Swarbrick was ordered to leave parliament. Brownlee later clarified Swarbrick could return on Wednesday but if she still refused to apologise she would again be removed from parliament. New Zealand has said it will make a decision in September about whether it would recognise Palestine as a state. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been strongly critical of growing international moves to recognise a Palestinian state. 'To have European countries and Australia march into that rabbit hole, just like that, fall right into it,' he said earlier this week. 'This canard is disappointing, and I think it's actually shameful. But it's not going to change our position.' Netanyahu went on to claim Israel was 'actually applying force judiciously, and they know it'. Foreign minister Winston Peters told parliament that over the next month the government would gather information and talk to partners, which would inform cabinet's decision. 'We'll be weighing this decision carefully rather than rushing to judgment,' Peters said. Along with the Green party, opposition parties Labour and Te Pati Maori support recognition of a Palestinian state. Labour parliamentarian Peeni Henare said New Zealand had a history of standing strong on its principles and values and in this case 'was being left behind'.

Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England
Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

Sky News

time30 minutes ago

  • Sky News

Facial recognition vans to be rolled out across police forces in England

The police's use of facial recognition technology is to be significantly expanded in an attempt to catch more offenders, ministers have announced. Under the plans, 10 live facial recognition (LFR) vans will be used by seven forces across England to help identify "sex offenders or people wanted for the most serious crimes", according to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. The tech, which has been trialled in London and south Wales, will be subject to strict rules, the Home Office said, but human rights groups have warned it is "dangerous and discriminatory". Amnesty International UK said the plans should be "immediately scrapped", with facial recognition proven to be "discriminatory against communities of colour". "It has been known to lead to misidentification and the risk of wrongful arrest," said Alba Kapoor, the charity's racial justice lead, "and it's also known to be less accurate in scanning the faces of people of colour." The Home Office said the LFR vans will only be deployed when there is "specific intelligence", and will be operated by trained officers who will check every match made by the cameras. The vehicles will also only be used against bespoke watch lists, compiled for each use under guidelines set by the College of Policing. The vans will be operated by police forces in Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire, Bedfordshire, Surrey and Sussex (jointly), and Thames Valley and Hampshire (jointly). 'The most serious offenders' Ms Cooper has said ministers are focused on making sure "there are proper safeguards in place". As part of the plans, the home secretary has announced she will be launching a consultation on how and when the cameras should be used, and with what safeguards, which the government will use to draw up a new legal framework for the use of the cameras. Ms Cooper said the tech had been used in London and South Wales "in a targeted way", and helped catch "the most serious offenders, including people wanted for violent assaults or for sex offences". According to the Metropolitan Police, the tech has led to 580 arrests for offences such as rape, domestic crime and knife crime in the space of 12 months. The government has pointed to independent testing by the National Physical Laboratory, which it said found the tech was "accurate" and showed "no bias for ethnicity, age, or gender". Liberty has welcomed the government's decision to create a statutory framework for using facial recognition, but said that should be in place before the tech is rolled out. "There's no reasonable excuse to be putting even more cameras on our streets before the public have had their say and legislation is brought in to protect all of us," said a statement. The civil liberties charity cited how more than 1.6 million people have had their faces scanned in South Wales, mostly on football match days in Cardiff city centre. But Lindsey Chiswick, from the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC), has said the expansion "is an excellent opportunity for policing", and will help officers locate suspects "quickly and accurately".

Police ordered to consider revealing ethnicity of suspects
Police ordered to consider revealing ethnicity of suspects

Sky News

timean hour ago

  • Sky News

Police ordered to consider revealing ethnicity of suspects

Police should consider disclosing the ethnicity and nationality of suspects when they are charged in high-profile and sensitive cases, new national guidance says. Coming into force today, it says there must be a policing reason to release the information, such as where there are high levels of disinformation, if it will improve public safety, or if it is significantly in the public interest. A Home Office spokesperson told Sky News they will support the new guidance by authorising the release of relevant accompanying immigration information if appropriate. The change comes after two men charged over the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton were reported to be Afghan asylum seekers, sparking protests. Warwickshire Police did not confirm the immigration status, leading to Reform UK accusing them of a cover-up, something the force strongly denied. Responding to the row, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said last week she wanted police to be more transparent, and that new guidance was being worked up. 2:41 How high-profile cases sparked debate When considering what information to release, police must consider contempt of court laws which aim to give defendants a fair trial, as well as media guidance from the College of Policing. Until now, the media guidance said once a suspect has been charged, police can give out information such as their name, date of birth and address. It did not mention anything about ethnicity, nationality, or immigration status. The Southport murders committed by Axel Rudakubana last July led to speculation about his ethnicity and immigration status, fuelling riots in many parts of the country. While the details were not initially released in that case, when a car ploughed into crowds celebrating Liverpool's Premier League win earlier this year, Merseyside Police were quick to say the suspect was a white British man. In the Nuneaton case, Reform leader Nigel Farage said retaining the "basic and sober facts" was "a cover-up that in many ways is reminiscent of what happened after the Southport killings". Warwickshire Police said officers "did not and will not cover up such criminality", and followed national guidance. How will new guidance work? The new guidance says it is at the discretion of the police force to decide whether to release ethnicity and nationality details, and that they must consider the ethical and legal implications. It says it is not the job of police to verify a suspect's immigration status, which rests with the Home Office. The advice has been developed by the National Police Chiefs' Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing, in consultation with the Home Office and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). Deputy chief constable Sam de Reya, the NPCC lead for communications and media, said: "We saw during last summer's disorder, as well as in several recent high-profile cases, what the major, real-world consequences can be from what information police release into the public domain. "We have to make sure our processes are fit for purpose in an age of social media speculation and where information can travel incredibly quickly across a wide range of channels. "Disinformation and incorrect narratives can take hold in a vacuum. It is good police work for us to fill this vacuum with the facts about issues of wider public interest." 3:31 'A chilling message' The guidance is interim, and will be considered as part of a wider review of the College of Policing's authorised professional practice for media relations later this year. Chief constable Sir Andy Marsh, the college's CEO, said officers will continue to police "without fear or favour". But the guidance is likely to provoke backlash from anti-racism campaigners. Last week, the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants warned that revealing ethnicity and migration status would "send a chilling message: that some people are inherently more 'suspect'". 'Public trust requires transparency' A Home Office spokesperson told Sky News they welcome the new guidance, adding: "Public trust requires transparency and consistency from the authorities that serve them." They added: "The public, and police forces themselves, want greater clarity on when, why and how information is released and the legitimate and compelling reasons it may need to be withheld. "The Home Office will support that effort by authorising the release of relevant accompanying immigration information in future cases, where it is appropriate to do so, and where the police have requested it. All cases will of course take account of consultation with the police and CPS. "The government also asked the Law Commission at the end of February to speed up the elements of its review around the law of contempt in relation to what can be said publicly ahead of a trial."

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