logo
Farage pledges to scrap two-child benefit cap and reverse winter fuel cut in pitch to Labour voters

Farage pledges to scrap two-child benefit cap and reverse winter fuel cut in pitch to Labour voters

ITV News27-05-2025

Nigel Farage has pledged to reverse the winter fuel cut and scrap the two child benefit cap, as he tries to position Reform UK as the main opposition to Labour.
The Reform UK leader accused Sir Keir Starmer of "betrayal" in a major speech on Tuesday, declaring "this prime minister has no connection with working people".
Flanked by council leaders, mayors and Runcorn MP Sarah Pochin, Farage said "lifting the two child cap is the right thing to do", and "we would reverse the taking away of the winter fuel allowance".
In the speech he also promised tax breaks for married couples to encourage them to have bigger families, telling the audience in London "we've lost our sense of focus of just how important family is".
Reform had huge success in the recent local elections, winning the Runcorn and Helsby by-election, taking control of six councils and winning two major mayoral contests.
Labour defended Starmer the son of a toolmaker, against the privately-educated 'stockbroker and career politician'.
Farage dubbed the PM a "globalist" who "bows down to the concept of international law", criticising his deal with the EU announced last week and his deal with the Chagos Islands.
After coming under increasing pressure to change course on a number of controversial policies in recent weeks, last week the prime minister announced a partial U-turn on winter fuel.
Starmer told MPs at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday his government wants "to ensure more pensioners are eligible" for winter fuel payments.
There had been suggestions the government would raise the threshold at which people are no longer eligible for the payments, but reports now indicate the Treasury is considering restoring the allowance to all but the very richest pensioners.
The Observer newspaper also reported on Sunday that the PM wants to scrap the two-child benefit cap and has ordered the Treasury to find money to fund it. The announcement is expected to be made as part of the government's child poverty strategy which is due to be published in the Autumn.
While Reform UK's new plans announced today are aimed at targeting Labour voters, many of their other policies are much more right-wing. They have pledged to scrap inheritance tax for estates under £2 million, and said they will "re-examine" the NHS funding model.
Their election manifesto also promised to raise the minimum income tax threshold to £20,000 a year, scrap the net zero target, put tax breaks on private school fees, and leave the European Convention on Human Rights.
Farage accepted his plans "are expensive", but insisted "we can pay for it". He said his party is "going to make big savings", by "scrap[ping] the DEI agenda", closing all asylum hotels, and getting rid of the net zero target.
The Reform leader was also asked about a campaign video labelled "racist" by Labour and the SNP.
Reform have come under fire over the Facebook video which claims the Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar leader will 'prioritise' the Pakistani community in Scotland.
Playing the video to journalists at the press conference, Farage accused Sarwar of "introduc[ing] sectarianism into Scottish politics".
Responding to the speech, Labour Party chairwoman Ellie Reeves said: 'Nigel Farage, a private-educated stockbroker and career politician, has only ever cared about his own self-interest and personal ambition, never about what is good for working people in this country.
'Farage wants to abolish the NHS, praised Liz Truss' disastrous mini-budget, opposed Labour's landmark employment reforms and said Jaguar Land Rover, a huge employer, deserves to go bust.
'His Reform manifesto included billions of pounds worth of unfunded spending pledges but did not commit to the triple lock. Farage must urgently clarify whether he will cut the state pension to pay for his reckless tax cuts."

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

LBC host's painful dig after Labour minister's embarrassing blunder on radio
LBC host's painful dig after Labour minister's embarrassing blunder on radio

Daily Mirror

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mirror

LBC host's painful dig after Labour minister's embarrassing blunder on radio

Labour minister Emma Reynolds, who was on LBC radio to tout a £1billion funding package to improve transport connections, became entangled in a series of embarrassing blunders A Treasury minister was tied in knots in a live radio interview this morning after struggling to answer questions on a Government-backed project. Emma Reynolds, who was on LBC radio to tout a £1billion funding package for transport, became entangled in a series of embarrassing blunders when she was grilled on the Lower Thames Crossing, a major infrastructure project which has today been handed £590million. ‌ The Treasury economic secretary was unable to give details of the precise location of the crossing or the total cost of the project. And she also mistakenly referred to the existing crossing being the "Dartmouth tunnel", apparently confusing the Devon town with Dartford. ‌ Host Nick Ferrari became increasingly frustrated over the interview, and after repeated sighs, eventually asked her: "Is there much point continuing this conversation?" After the blunder, Ferrari challenged Ms Reynolds on what she knew about the project. Asked about the proposed new crossing start and end point, she said: "You'll forgive me, I can't recall the exact landing zone." She explained what the Lower Thames Crossing was and said it would help lorries who are coming from the Midlands and the North to key ports in the south east. Ferrari hit back: "It's almost like you were reading from a piece of paper there, isn't it? You don't actually know where it takes off from or where it lands, do you?" When she could not say, he said: "Let me tell you, it's Gravesend in Kent and Tilbury in Essex." ‌ Pressed on the cost, she said "it's going to cost quite a lot of money", suggesting it would be "several billion pounds". Ferrari said: "How many? You don't know that either do you actually? I don't mean to be rude to you personally. Is there much point continuing this conversation, because you don't know where a bridge starts, you don't know where it ends and you don't know how much it costs? Is there any point continuing? "What does this say about the economic stewardship of this country that someone in your position of importance, you don't know where a bridge starts, you don't know where it ends, and you don't know much it costs." ‌ Ms Reynolds said: "I'm here to talk about the the broader infrastructure plan as well that we will be launching later this week." The tense interview comes ahead of the Government's 10-year infrastructure strategy, which is expected to be published this week. It follows a record £15.6bn investment in major transport projects in the North and Midlands announced in Rachel Reeves's Spending Review. The £590m for the Lower Thames Crossing, which will help cut traffic at Dartford, is part of a £1bn pledge to renew broken bridges, roads and tunnels. The new structures fund will also invest in repairing bridges, flyovers, tunnels and other transport infrastructure such as roads. The Treasury said approximately 3,000 bridges are currently unable to support the heaviest vehicles, while the number of bridge collapses has also risen.

‘Hundreds of people' could deserve jail over grooming gangs cover-up, claim Tories
‘Hundreds of people' could deserve jail over grooming gangs cover-up, claim Tories

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

‘Hundreds of people' could deserve jail over grooming gangs cover-up, claim Tories

Update: Date: 2025-06-16T08:43:36.000Z Title: Aletha Adu Content: Good morning. All governments have to perform U-turns from time to time and over the weekend Keir Starmer had to stage another, announcing that he would order a national inquiry into the grooming gangs scandal. Although Starmer can argue that he never firmly ruled out an inquiry, and that he is just responding to a recommendation from a short, evidence-based audit of 'our understanding of the scale, nature and drivers' of grooming gang abuse conducted by Louise Casey, this is still embarrassing because it is an obvious victory for Kemi Badenoch, Reform UK and Elon Musk (probably the prime mover in this) who were aggressively lobbying for one in the new year. Badenoch is now saying Starmer should apologise for not agreeing with her more swiftly. As explained last week, when the opposition has to resort to demanding an apology, that is normally a sign of weakness, not strength, because it means it is running out of proper grievances to pursue. But this remains difficult territory for Labour. The No 10 press operation will be grateful that it has been quite low down the news agenda because of what is happening in the Middle East. Here is 's overnight story. And here is an analysis by Peter Walker, who is with Starmer at the G7 in Canada and who explain how Starmer broke the news about the inquiry in a huddle with reporters on the plane crossing the Atlantic. And here are the key developments this morning. The Home Office has announced that National Crime Agency will lead a national operation against grooming gangs. It says: The NCA will work in partnership with police forces around the country and specialist officers from the Child Sexual Exploitation Taskforce, Operation Hydrant – which supports police forces to address all complex and high profile cases of child sexual abuse – and the Tackling Organised Exploitation Programme. Their job will be to give victims of these horrific crimes, whose cases were not progressed through the criminal justice system, long-awaited justice and prevent more children from being hurt by these vile criminals. This will build on action already taken by the government to see offenders locked up. Police have already reopened over 800 historic cases of group-based child sexual abuse since the home secretary asked them in January to look again at cases that were closed too early and victims denied justice. The Home Office is due to publish the Casey report into the grooming gangs. Casey was asked at the start of the year to 'uncover the nature, scale and profile of group based CSEA [child sexual exploitation and abuse] offending', to provide evidence about the ethnicity of offenders, and to consider 'the cultural and societal drivers for this type of offending and the motivations and characteristics of grooming gang offending'. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, has claimed that there could be hundreds of people who deserve to go to jail for covering up grooming gang abuse. In an interview with Sky News defending the need for an inquiry, Philp said: What I've heard in the last few months, meeting retired police officers and meeting survivors, and what has really shocked me, has been the way that this was deliberately covered up over years and possibly decades. It wasn't that people were just negligent or just didn't look into it properly. They deliberately and actively covered it up. I'm talking about senior police officers, local council leaders, social services, the Crown Prosecution Service. And the reason they deliberately covered it up for years was because the victims were mainly very young white girls, often from troubled backgrounds, from care homes and so on, whereas the perpetrators were mainly of Pakistani heritage. And people in authority at the time were more concerned about so-called race relations than they were about protecting young girls … There's a criminal offence called misconduct in public office, and I think those people – and I'm not talking about handful, it is probably dozens or maybe hundreds of people in positions of authority over the years – deliberately covered this up. I think they are guilty of that criminal offence and frankly should be going to prison. As an example, Philp cited evidence given by John Piekos, a former police office who says that, after he left the force and tried to get the police in West Yorkshire to investigate grooming at a children's home in Bradford, he was told by a serving police officer and a council official to drop the Here is the agenda for the day. 9.30am: John Swinney, Scotland's first minister, gives a speech promising a 'national project of renewal'. Morning: Rachel Reeves, the chancellor (who was also promising renewal in her spending review last week), is on a visit in the north-east of England, promoting plans to improve the road network/ 11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing. 2.30pm: Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, takes questions in the Commons. After 3.30pm: David Lammy, the foreign secretary, and Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, are both due to make Commons statement, on the Israel/Iran conflict, and the inquiry into grooming gangs respectfully. But we are not sure yet which is coming first, and, if the Speaker allows one or more urgent questions, they will come first. Around 5pm (UK time): Keir Starmer is due to arrive at the G7 meeting in Canada. If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @ The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.

Is it any wonder that the UK is such an unequal society?
Is it any wonder that the UK is such an unequal society?

The Herald Scotland

time4 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Is it any wonder that the UK is such an unequal society?

Do our imperial masters still consider our country to be part of the British Empire and try to consolidate that status by handing out a few baubles in the hope of keeping the masses happy? No wonder the UK is such an unequal society, led by a Prime Minister who also happens to be a benighted knight of the realm. Dennis Canavan, Bannockburn. Inexcusable indifference I refer to Doug Maughan's letter of June 13, 'Hypocrisy and double standards taint the West's view of Israel'. I suggest that Benjamin Netanyahu believes that as long as he has Donald Trump guarding his back, he has nothing to fear from the International Criminal Court (ICC). The Trump administration has already imposed sanctions on four judges at the ICC over the tribunal's investigation into Israel's alleged war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank. While the five countries (thankfully including the UK) who are imposing sanctions on two Israeli far-right ministers are members of the ICC, neither Israel nor the US is. Both are countries which believe they are above international law, outwith the bounds of common decency. Mr Maughan's letter ought to be recognised as a call not only to our 'leaders' but to each one of us. We must resist 'the temptation to shrug and look away'. Indifference, silence, on our part to such suffering as the Palestinians are experiencing is inexcusable and makes us allies of Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers. John Milne, Uddingston. * Doug Maughan may also be interested to know that it has been reported that former Labour MP Lord Austin has been sent by the government to Israel 'as a trade envoy to maintain our relationship with Israeli businesses.' Money is also regularly raised by the sale of Israeli government bonds on the London market. Israeli banks involved in the West Bank are also active in London. I'm sure that the Prime Minister, being an ex-lawyer, will be able to explain to this confused member of the public why Israel's activities in Gaza and the West Bank are much less serious than those of Russia in Ukraine and the former South African government, both sanctioned. Ewan Henderson, Haddington. Let's sanction this warfare state History repeats itself with false claims about what a perceived enemy is about to do. On February 3, 2003, British journalists were handed a dossier purporting to show Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ready to be used within days in an attack on the UK. Tony Blair went on television later that month saying Iraq had 'vast quantities of... anthrax, VX nerve agent, and mustard gas' and we had to strike. On June 14, 2025 Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said that Iran could have produced a nuclear weapon in a very short time' while a henchman averred that 'Iran had enough fission material for 15 nuclear bombs within days'. Yet weeks earlier Tulsi Gabbard, the US National Intelligence Director, stated to Congress that the US 'continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon' and that its leader 'has not authorised a nuclear weapons programme that he suspended in 2003'. Over the past year Israel has mercilessly bombed Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and now Iran, killing thousands and causing chaos and carnage. It is a warfare state. With a population of 10 million it has over 600 warplanes, not far short of the total strength of the RAF. It is led by an extreme right-wing cabal untrusted by 70% of the Israeli people, according to opinion polls. It's time for the UK to place sanctions on this dangerous regime and stop supplying arms, intelligence and material to it. William Loneskie, Lauder, Berwickshire. Spineless attitude towards Iran My, how times change. Under our current Labour party leadership Britain has given away the Chagos Isles, handed the EU a say in the future of Gibraltar and now produces no response to the Iranian threat to our shores if we aid Israel. Where is the spine of the British government? When given a choice of supporting Iran or Israel in the current situation there should be no hesitation yet there is and Labour has been very critical of only Israel. Israel has targeted precise locations for missiles whilst Iran has just fired them off indiscriminately. Where is the harsh criticism of Iran, where the press can only report stories favourable to the regime? Does Labour think the world will really be safer if Iran has a nuclear bomb? Right now that seems to be its position, ably backed up in Scotland by the theoretically anti-nuclear SNP and the Greens. Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow. Nuclear power and renewables Can anyone explain to me how hydro power and nuclear power are equivalent in how they supply electricity to the grid? ('Should Scotland blindly follow England down the nuclear power path?', Rebecca McQuillan, June 12). My understanding is that the amount of energy produced by a nuclear plant is pretty much fixed. It can not easily be modulated to increase or reduce output and the only change comes when it is being serviced (a planned break) or when there is a fault (an unplanned break). Whereas the hydro power system that Rebecca talks about has a reservoir into which water can be pumped at times of excess electricity. Then, at times of high demand for electricity, water can be released from the reservoir to generate power. The hydro power/reservoir system works like a battery that can be switched on and off at times of high or low demand. So nuclear power and the hydro/reservoir system perform fundamentally differently. If we have nuclear power, we need an additional system to deal with the ups and downs of electricity demand and to deal with the times when the nuclear power station closes down, which can happen unexpectedly. This flexible source of energy could be provided by a battery type system (such as the hydro power/reservoir system) or a generator that can be powered up and down easily (such as a gas-fired power station) or a cable from Norway or somewhere. Nuclear power does nothing to offset the ups and downs of renewables. J. Pountain, Glasgow. A fair system of Legal Aid One has to hope that our nation is sufficiently civilised as to enable those of otherwise insufficient means to obtain access to legal representation in our courts ('Scots court chaos looms as solicitors boycott scheme', June 10). At the same time, that seems unlikely to happen when you consider the competing claims on public finances, such as the NHS, the putative care service, dilapidated schools, housing crisis, national defence, winter fuel payments, the two-child benefit cap, ferries and other causes that are more likely than legal aid to appeal to the electorate. Even if the current campaign were to achieve a realistic settlement, for how long would that last? Clearly the government has no long-term will to support an effective legal aid system. I would therefore like to ask the solicitors' profession where lies the constitutional duty to provide public access to justice, whether with the government as the national executive or with the judicial arm of the nation's constitution. Certainly, the government is signed up to international treaties to provide access to justice but that appears to have cut little ice in the last 40 years since the state took over control of the legal aid system from the solicitors' profession. The whole raison d'etre of that profession and of the constitutional monopoly it enjoys in professional legal representation, is that it has a responsibility to the whole nation, whether or not the government provides sufficient financial support. A solicitor's duty to an immediate client may therefore require to be balanced with the responsibility of the profession to the public as a whole. Consideration therefore might need to be given to a system which operates in other jurisdictions. whereby the solicitors' profession provides legal representation for the impecunious, financed equitably across the profession out of fees paid by the financially more fortunate clients of that profession. This would be somewhat along the lines of the legal representation that was made available via the Poor Roll, prior to the formal institution of the legal aid system which has now fallen into substantial disrepair. Michael Sheridan, Scotstoun, Glasgow.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store