Kemi Badenoch refuses to kick Liz Truss out of Conservative Party
Kemi Badenoch has refused to kick former prime minister Liz Truss out of the Conservative Party.
The Tory leader suggested such a move would be 'neither here nor there' for voters' perception of the party.
In a speech on Thursday, shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride sought to distance the Conservatives from Ms Truss's mini-budget, saying the party needed to show 'contrition' to restore its economic credibility.
In a furious response, Ms Truss accused Sir Mel of having 'kowtowed to the failed Treasury orthodoxy' and being 'set on undermining my plan for growth'.
Asked by the BBC on Friday whether she would consider throwing former prime minister Ms Truss out of the Conservatives in a symbolic break with her short-lived, turbulent time in No 10, Mrs Badenoch replied: 'Is she still in the party?'
Ms Truss, the former Conservative MP for South West Norfolk, is understood to be a Tory party member still.
Speaking to the BBC, Mrs Badenoch said: 'What is really important is what Mel was saying yesterday. What he was saying was that the mini-budget did not balance. It wasn't tax cuts, it was the … £150 billion of spending increases on energy bills that did not make sense.'
Pressed whether she believed the mini-budget had damaged the Conservative brand, Mrs Badenoch said: 'Well, look at what happened, people didn't understand why we had done that, and so our reputation for economic competence was damaged.'
When asked again why she would not consider kicking Ms Truss out of the party, the Tory leader said: 'It is not about any particular individual. I don't want to be commenting on previous prime ministers.
'They've had their time. What am I going to do now? Removing people from a political party is neither here nor there in terms of what it is your viewers want to see.'
After insisting Ms Truss was not in Parliament anymore, Mrs Badenoch said her party needed to 'focus on how we're going to get this country back on track'.
'What we have right now is a Labour Government, it's Keir Starmer. We need to stop talking about several prime ministers ago and talk about the Prime Minister we've got now and what he's doing to the country,' the Tory leader said.
Ms Truss this week appeared in a video to promote the Irish whiskey brand of bare-knuckle fighter Dougie Joyce, who was once jailed for attacking a 78-year-old man in a pub in 2022.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Spending Review: Massive cheques from the chancellor for some - but what do totals hide?
The next few days are vital – "one of the last moments to weave it all together – to look politically credible to the people Labour has lost", one senior figure reckons. There have been huge fights inside government about the looming Spending Review. As I write, the home secretary and deputy prime minister are both still in dispute with the mighty Treasury over the amount of cash they'll have to spend. But the Treasury's already trying to convince the public the review is about significant investment. On Wednesday Rachel Reeves boasted of funnelling billions more taxpayers' cash to big transport projects outside the wealthier south east of England, having tweaked the Treasury rules to do it. Now, with five days still to go, I've been passed some of the information that'll be in the pages of Wednesday's review. It's one crucial chart that will be in the huge bundle of documents heading to the printing presses on Tuesday night that shows what's called TDEL – the Total Departmental Expenditure Limit. In other words, the total that government spends, including the day-to-day costs of running public services and long-term spending on big projects. But it doesn't include costs that government can't set in advance – like pensions and benefits, or debt interest. The chart spans 2010 to 2030, so takes in the coalition years, where you can see the total sliding down, then the Conservative years when spending starts rising after the Brexit referendum, then leaps up during Covid. And then, when Labour took charge, the red line going up steeply at first, then more slowly towards the end of this parliamentary term. The total real terms spending by 2029-30? More than £650bn – roughly £100bn more than when Labour took office. The pale blue line is what would have happened to spending if the Conservatives had managed to hang on to power last year. The government now is allergic to accusations that any cuts they make will be a return to austerity. And this chart shows that overall spending is going up considerably, compared to those lean years. The political argument around spending will rage but the chancellor did - to use the ghastly technical term – set out the "spending envelope" in her autumn Budget, indicating rises were coming. You can bet they'll want to use every chance they have to say they are spending significantly more than the Tories planned to under Rishi Sunak. The government's political opponents on the other hand, may look at that red line as it climbs steeply upwards and say: "See, public spending is ballooning out of control". This chart does illustrate very significant rises in public spending. But be careful. What this chart doesn't give us is any idea of how those massive totals break down. Massive chunks will go to favoured departments, suggestions of an extra £30bn for the NHS today. And a very significant part of that steep rise will be allocated to long-term projects, not running public services, some of which are struggling. The overall total may be enormous, but a couple of parts of government greedily suck in billions - others will still feel the pain. A case in point – as I write on Saturday morning, the Home Office is still arguing over its settlement, believing there isn't enough cash to provide the number of police the government has promised, while the front pages are full of stories about the NHS receiving another bumper deal. So observe this big health warning. The chart gives us a sense of the political argument the chancellor will make. But it doesn't tell the full story or give the crucial totals, department by department, decision by decision. It's worth saying it's incredibly unusual to see any of this before the day itself, hinting perhaps at jitters in No 11 about how the review will be received. Until we hear the chancellor's speech, and then see all of the documents in full on Wednesday, the story of the Spending Review won't be clear. There will be reams of statistics, produced by government, and the official number crunchers, the OBR, and then days of analysis by think tanks and experts in the aftermath. But bear in mind these three core facts. Rachel Reeves will put a huge amount of cash, tens and tens of billions, towards long term projects. Short-term spending money will be tight, with no spare cash for sweeteners. And the government is not popular, so there's huge pressure to tell a convincing story to try to change that, not least because of what went wrong the last time. "We can't ever do it like this again." After Labour's first Budget, government insiders concluded next time, it had to be different. A source recalls: "It was a very brutal exercise - it was literally just making the sums add up, there was no collective approach to what the priorities were." Alongside a lot of extra cash for the NHS, there was a big tax rise for business that came out of the blue. No one wants a repeat of that experience. The "next time" is now – and a Labour source warns the review might be as "painful as hell" . So the task for a government struggling in the polls is to make this moment more than just a gruesome arithmetic problem, instead, to use the power of the state's cheque book to make, and go on to win an argument. Stick a fiver on Rachel Reeves referring back to that first Budget as "fixing the foundations" of the economy and public services, this week then being the moment to start, "rebuilding Britain". Sources suggest she has three aspects in mind: security for the country (which will explain all those billions for defence), the health of the nation - that does what it says on the tin, and "investing", all that cash for long-term projects. Next week's decisions will be followed soon after by the government's industrial strategy which will promise support for business, possibly including cash to help with sky-high energy costs. And it comes after several big staging posts – the immigration white paper, trade deals, the defence review. In government circles there's hope of denting some of the criticisms that they have been slow to get moving in office, that, frankly, Sir Keir Starmer arrived in government without having worked out what he really wanted to do. One Whitehall insider tells me, "Now the buses are all arriving at once – maybe the idea of this lacklustre government that didn't have a plan will be blown away by July?" Another Labour source suggests the threat from Nigel Farage has actually forced the government to get moving, visibly, and decisively: "Reform gives us the impetus to actually shake this stuff down." That's the rosy view of how the chancellor might be able to play a difficult hand. It might not be reality. It is profoundly uncomfortable for a Labour government to make cuts. There is already a whiff of rebellion in the air over ministers' welfare plans. Expanding free school meals for kids in England seems designed to placate some of those critics in advance, but there could be more to make them mutinous. Don't forget Reeves has several different audiences – not just the public and her party, but the financial bigwigs too. This time last year all Labour's schmoozing was paying off, and she enjoyed good reviews in the City. One year on, that mood has shifted, in part because of the autumn budget. According to one city source, it "damaged her. People saw it as an about turn on her promises. Raising National Insurance, however they want to present it, went against the spirit of the manifesto… confidence in her in the City is diminished and diminishing", not least because there is chatter about more tax hikes in the autumn budget. Sign up for the Off Air with Laura K newsletter to get Laura Kuenssberg's expert insight and insider stories every week, emailed directly to you. You probably don't need me to remind you that the level of taxes collected by government are historically sky high. So too, at the other end, is the amount of government debt. A former Treasury minister told me this morning, "debt is the central issue of our time, nationally and globally". "There is a real risk our debt becomes unsustainable this Parliament, unless we make tough choices about what the state does. We can't keep on muddling through." Add in the twists, tariffs and tantrums of the man in the White House, that make the global economic situation uncertain and the picture's not pretty. But politics hinges on finding advantage in adversity. Polling suggests much of the country reckons Labour inherited a bad hand and has played it badly. This week, the chancellor has a chance to change the game. No 11 is determined to prove that she has made decisions only a Labour chancellor would make. And Reeves is gambling that her decisions to shovel massive amounts of money into long term spending helps the economy turn, and translates into political support well before the next general election. A senior Labour source said, Wednesday will be "the moment, this government clicks into gear, or it won't". There's no guarantee. 'It's going to be ugly': Westminster braces for Spending Review The Conservative Party faces problems - is its leader one of them? The country where the left (not the far right) made hardline immigration laws BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.
Miami Herald
3 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Lululemon analysts reboot stock price target after earnings
Now that was a real lulu. The dictionary tells us that the slang term "lulu", which dates to the 1850s, can be used to describe a person or thing "outstanding for some quality." Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter That quality can be positive or negative, and for Lululemon (LULU) it translated into about 5 pounds of oy vey in a two-pound bag. Shares of the Vancouver athleisure giant nosedived on June 6 after it beat Wall Street's first-quarter-earnings expectations but slashed its full-year guidance, citing a "dynamic macroenvironment" that included increased competition and the impact of the Trump administration's tariffs. "The current tariff paradigm has brought uncertainty into the retail environment," Chief Executive Calvin McDonald told analysts during the earnings call. "As consumers try to assess the impact they will have on daily life, as businesses evaluate these impacts as well, I believe we are better positioned than most to navigate the near term while also maintaining our focus on investing in our growth potential over the long term," he added. Chief Financial Officer Meghan Frank said Lululemon estimated a thinner operating margin, which measures profitability by dividing a company's operating income by its net sales for the full year. It now expects a narrowing of 1.6 percentage points, compared with the previous estimate of 1 point, "all driven by the net impact of tariffs." More Retail Stocks: Halloween retailer sounds warning consumers need to hearTarget expands same-day delivery to 100s of retailersWalmart makes surprise cuts as it looks at tariff price hikes "We are planning to take strategic price increases, looking item by item across our assortment as we typically do, and it will be price increases on a small portion of our assortment, and they will be modest in nature," she said. Comparable sales in the quarter rose 1% from a year earlier, missing analysts' forecasts calling for a 3% increase. The result reflects a 2% decrease in the Americas and a 6% increase internationally. "We're definitely not happy where the growth is in the U.S., but relative to the market and our performance versus others, pleased that we're putting on share, pleased with the reaction to the newness and with the mix of newness that's coming," McDonald said. Lululemon is known for advanced athletic apparel, particularly its workout leggings, and it is said to use "holistic guerrilla marketing" to make customers feel that they are part of a community. In April, President Donald Trump unleashed a broad range of tariffs that he has since paused and rebooted several times, causing widespread confusion among companies and consumers and in the markets. Several retailers have reduced or withdrawn their guidance and indicated that they would raise prices due to the uncertainty surrounding the tariff regime. Meanwhile, Trump said that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick would travel to London along with U.S. Trade Representative Jameson Greer on June 9 for renewed trade talks with China, adding that "the meeting should go very well." Related: Lululemon's latest viral product reveals something much bigger Lululemon's stock sank nearly 20% on June 6. The shares are off 31% in 2025 and down roughly 18% from a year earlier. Several investment firms issued research reports on Lululemon following the earnings report, including Needham, which lowered its price target to $317 from $366 and affirmed a buy rating on the shares, according to The Fly. The company posted fairly lackluster Q1 results, though the selloff in the stock seems "aggressive" relative to the size of management's guidance cut, the investment firm said. That's particularly since the guidance reduction is mostly tariff-driven, and also considers that management struck an encouraging tone about how new products are performing, Needham said. Lululemon's domestic business remains sluggish, however, while international comparable-sales growth slowed in Q1, likely raising questions about the growth algorithm going forward, Needham added. Telsey Advisory analyst Dana Telsey pared the firm's price target on Lululemon to $360 from $385 and maintained an outperform rating. The Q1 results "nicely topped" the Wall Street consensus and the company's guidance, Telsey said. Consumers continue to respond well to newness and new-product launches, Tesley added. BMO Capital lowered its price target on Lululemon to $250 from $302 and maintained a market-perform rating. The company reported what the investment firm called a slight top- and bottom-line beat to estimates, with better gross margins partly offset by a miss of estimates for selling, general and administrative expense. But looking ahead, BMO Capital said, management guided in Q2 "materially below" estimates and pared the fiscal 2025 outlook for gross margin and earnings due to tariffs and markdowns. This marks the first time the company has lowered its fiscal-year earnings forecast at Q1 since fiscal 2014, BMO Capital said. Related: Fund-management veteran skips emotion in investment strategy The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Schwarzenegger: Stop whining about Trump and act on climate change
Credit: BBC Arnold Schwarzenegger has urged environmentalists to 'stop whining' about Donald Trump's approach to climate change and instead 'get to work'. The veteran actor, 77, said Mr Trump was not a barrier to change and activists should stop using him as an excuse not to act. 'I've noticed people always said to me: 'Well, what is the point of fighting the environmental issue here and to reduce pollution, with Trump in the White House?'' the activist told the BBC after appearing on stage at a climate conference in Vienna. Mr Trump and his administration have repeatedly called climate change a hoax, despite the scientific evidence. 'I tell them: 'Hey, stop whining,'' he continued. 'We all have a responsibility. What – do you think that action comes only for the whole world out of Washington, the White House? No. You have to be aware of your obstacles, but you should not go and use them as an excuse.' The former Republican governor of California, who focused on environmental issues during his time in office, has continued campaigning globally on climate change since leaving politics. 'Be the mayor that makes buses electric; be the CEO who ends fossil fuel dependence; be the school that puts [up] solar roofs,' he said at the Austrian World Summit, a climate event in Vienna he helped to organise. 'You can't just sit around and make excuses because one guy in a very nice White House on Pennsylvania Avenue doesn't agree with you,' said Schwarzenegger. 'I know that the people are sick and tired of the whining and the complaining and the doom and gloom,' he said. 'The only way we win the people's hearts and minds is by showing them action that makes their lives better.' On his first day in office, Mr Trump fulfilled his energy campaign promises by ending the Democrats' war on fossil fuels. He issued executive orders promoting oil and gas production and withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. The president also withdrew from other commitments in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Mr Trump has pledged to open hundreds more coal-fired power plants and to halt closures driven by environmental regulations in an effort to compete with China, the world's largest source of carbon emissions. However, Beijing has embarked on its own ambitious clean energy plans, including rolling out affordable electric vehicles domestically and internationally that compete fiercely with Tesla. Much of that has been driven by an interest in boosting the Chinese economy, and to clear the blanket of thick black smoke and smog that has covered China for decades and upset the country's residents. Coal is the most polluting form of energy, and has contributed to significant health risks and even fatalities in China. As the world's most populous nation with more than 1.4 billion people – more than four times that of the US – China has extremely high energy demands to keep the country running. While the US also has energy demands to meet, the country was previously seen as a leader in climate change, particularly under Barack Obama, and in bringing the world together to lower global emissions. However, Mr Trump has reversed his predecessors' energy agenda on net zero and incentives for wind and solar, going against what many other countries are doing. The UK, for instance, became the first G7 country to end the use of coal power when it shut down its last coal-fired power station last September. The government has also banned all new fossil fuel extraction in a bid to accelerate the move toward renewable energy sources. 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.
