It's time for Starmer and Reeves to embrace the soft left
Despite a landslide majority, and a previously iron parliamentary discipline inherited from last year's election campaign, Keir Starmer has had to u-turn twice within a week to stave off backbench revolt against his flagship welfare reform legislation. And the truth is that this humiliation has been better than the alternative which would have been putting the unamended legislation to the vote in the House of Commons to see it defeated – as it inevitably would have.
A retreat allows Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves to live to fight another day. A defeat would have shattered their political authority jointly and severally – for make no mistake this government's economic management is a combined political endeavour, seen as that by voters and money markets alike. For all the feverish talk in parliamentary lobbies, Rachel Reeves really is 'going nowhere' as No 10 has said.
Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves are bound together – as prime ministers and chancellors inevitably are. As are the entirety of the current cabinet because in this is a case where the discipline of collective responsibility really bites. Just as in 'Murder on the Orient Express' they all had a hand in this. They all agreed to plans to cut disability benefits by some £5bn a year, and simple arithmetic tells you that amounts to a cut of at least £1000 a year for a million people or, as in this case £4500 a year for nearly a million people with disabilities. Big numbers require big cuts which always means big pain.
So, if Cabinet members are seeking advantage and briefing against the Chancellor they should remember: 'First they came for the Winter Fuel Payment, and I did not speak out for I was not a pensioner. Then they came for Personal Independence Payments and I did not speak out…'.
We are nearly a year into the rigors of government, so all members of Labour's leadership need to shape up or the voters will ship them out. What are the lessons for Labour?
The obvious one is that like so many political problems the issue is the policy not the communications. If you can't explain why you are doing something then just don't do it. There was not a single argument mounted for cutting Personal Independence Payments (PIP) despite ministers repeating the mantra that there was a moral case for the cuts.
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
So, what was the underlying case for change? Logically, it can't have been to do with work incentives as it's an in-work benefit. And it's not driven by public opinion. Luke Tryl at More in Common says people were disgusted when they heard the details of the cuts and who suffers. These cuts aren't even popular with the 'hero' voters of the Red Wall – not least because there are a higher proportion of PIP concentrated in Red Wall areas. According to those who campaigned in Doncaster in May it nearly cost them the mayoralty – only Labour's world class field operations saved the day. Like so many other errors in politics, this was a demonstration of the folly of defending the indefensible – and doing that for far too long.
The less obvious point is that it's time for both Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves to embrace the 'soft left' part of the government's agenda and to become associated with it. Because that's the truly popular part of what Labour is doing – but it's buried as though Labour are ashamed. When focus groups are told that the National Living Wage is now two-thirds of median earnings they are surprised but pleased. The same goes for the extension of workers' rights and renters' rights. The bitter irony is that it's only the most unpopular things that the Labour government are doing which get any coverage in the media. The truly popular things Labour is doing are being done by stealth.
If I were advising Keir and Rachel on a reset, I'd say 'Just go for it! Use the power of government to intervene for the public good. Call up Thames Water and tell them you accept that they can't carry on doing business under the current regulatory machine. And that's why you're nationalising them. You'll get a bargain basement asset that can generate you a return. And you'll show the voters that you get it – what counts is what's most social democratic!'
[See more: Is Keir Starmer turning into Harold Wilson?]
Related
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Boosting productivity will be main priority of autumn budget, Reeves says
Rachel Reeves has promised to use her autumn budget to prioritise fixing Britain's dismal record on productivity as she sought to downplay mounting tax speculation with a focus on economic growth. Setting out her priorities for the budget for the first time, the chancellor said tackling the efficiency of the economy through higher investment and a fresh assault on planning rules would form the backbone of her tax and spending plans. Writing exclusively for the Guardian, she said: 'If Labour's first year in power was about fixing the foundations, then the second year is about building a stronger economy for a renewed Britain.' However, Reeves pushed back against what she called 'speculation' over tax increases being explored by the Treasury to close a yawning gap in the public finances that is estimated to reach more than £40bn. 'The months and weeks before any budget are filled with people speculating about – or claiming to know – what tax and spend decisions I will take or what the Office for Budget Responsibility [OBR] will conclude,' she said. 'This budget is no different – I get that. I will set out the decisions I take in the responsible manner.' The chancellor's comments come as the government braces for gloomy official figures that are expected to show the economy narrowly avoided flatlining in the second quarter. With Labour under mounting pressure over its management of the economy, City forecasters predict that Thursday morning's update from the Office for National Statistics will find that GDP rose by 0.1% in the three months to June. The UK outpaced its G7 peers in the first quarter with growth of 0.7%. However, experts have blamed tax increases announced by Reeves in her first budget, last October, and Donald Trump's trade war for a marked hit to activity. The chancellor, aiming to shrug off the anaemic performance, argued the government was taking steps to break a 'cycle of low growth' in which Britain had become trapped under Conservative governments. Laying out one of the central themes of her budget, which could be held in November, Reeves said the government would aim to boost the productive capacity of the economy by allocating investment for infrastructure projects and ripping up planning rules. 'If renewal is our mission and productivity is our challenge, then investment and reform are our tools,' she said. Sign up to Business Today Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning after newsletter promotion Earlier on Wednesday, the Guardian revealed that Keir Starmer was preparing to revive plans for the Northern Powerhouse Rail project, which would improve transport connections between the main cities of northern England. Reeves has ordered Treasury officials to draw up proposals for slashing additional red tape in the UK's planning system to speed up large infrastructure projects. 'We are providing that investment and unblocking the barriers to it too,' she said. Successive chancellors have pushed to solve what economists refer to as a 'productivity puzzle' that has contributed to the UK's sluggish growth since the 2008 financial crisis. Productivity growth is considered one of the key determinants for raising living standards and wages over the long term. However, progress to drive up the measure of output per hour of work has stalled in recent years. The chancellor's renewed focus comes as the Treasury braces for a potentially devastating downgrade in productivity forecasts from the OBR, which could blow a £20bn hole in the chancellor's tax and spending plans. With the shortfall made worse by a weak growth outlook, higher debt interest payments, and a series of U-turns on welfare cuts, Reeves and the prime minister are laying the groundwork for tax rises and changes from September, before the autumn budget. The Guardian revealed on Tuesday that the Treasury was looking at ways to raise more money from inheritance tax to reduce the deficit. Labour MPs have been pushing the idea of a wealth tax, but changes to inheritance tax thresholds could be similarly controversial. Sarah Coles, the head of personal finance at Hargreaves Lansdown, said it was 'hardly surprising' that inheritance tax was 'back in the frame'. It is among a limited suite of taxes that can be changed, despite the government's commitment to not increase the basic, higher or additional rates of income tax, employee national insurance or VAT. 'The system is so fiendishly complex that there are an enormous number of rules, and therefore tweaks, that the government could consider,' Coles added.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Tulip Siddiq ‘used influence over her aunt to acquire land for family'
Tulip Siddiq used her 'special power' as an MP in Britain to exert influence over her aunt, the former prime minister of Bangladesh, to acquire state-owned land, an anti-corruption trial was told. Prosecutors in Bangladesh allege that Siddiq applied pressure on Sheikh Hasina, who was deposed as the country's leader last year, to secure plots of land for her mother, brother, and sister. Siddiq, 42, resigned as the anti-corruption minister in Sir Keir Starmer's government in January over 'reputational risks' from her family's links with the Hasina regime. The MP is not attending the trial at Dhaka Special Judge Court 4, which formally began on Wednesday, and has described the case against her as 'persecution and a farce'. • Joy and trepidation in Bangladesh a year since ousting of Sheikh Hasina She claims to have become 'collateral damage' in a power struggle between her aunt and Muhammad Yunus, Hasina's replacement as leader in the south Asian country. Officials from the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) told the court that Siddiq played a central role in acquiring plots of land for relatives in the diplomatic zone of Dhaka in 2022. The court was told that Siddiq had learnt that her aunt had 'used her power' to acquire plots in the Purbachal New Town Project, a long-running land development programme operated by a government agency, Rajuk. Siddiq is then said to have 'simultaneously used her special power to exert pressure and influence on her aunt', according to Afnan Jannat Keya, an ACC assistant director. He said that this led to plots being allotted to her mother, Sheikh Rehana; her sister, Azmina Siddique; and her brother, Radwan Mujib Siddiq. • Tulip Siddiq's flyers found in palace of deposed Bangladesh leader Siddiq is also accused of seeking to influence the secretary of the Ministry of Housing and Public Works and other officials on the instructions of her aunt to acquire a plot for her sister. 'In view of this, the Ministry of Housing and Public Works issued a letter to the chairman of Rajuk to proceed with the allotment,' the court heard. Siddiq is alleged to own a flat in the upmarket Gulshan neighbourhood of the capital, Dhaka, which investigators say should have ruled her out from availing of the award of land under the scheme. The ACC is examining claims that Hasina and her family misappropriated billions of pounds of state money during her 15-year reign. Hasina, who is living in exile in India after fleeing during mass protests, faces trial in absentia for crimes against humanity during her time in power. Judge Muhammad Rabiul Alam heard the opening statements from three ACC officials relating to three cases on Wednesday. SM Rashidul Hasan, another ACC assistant director, named Tulip Siddiq among 16 people who are accused of offences, including her brother and aunt. The judge set aside August 28 for the next stage in the trial, when prosecution witnesses and evidence will be presented. In a statement published on Monday, Siddiq claimed that she had yet to receive a summons, adding: 'No fair legal process should begin with a media headline. Unfortunately that's what I have been handed out. No engagement. No evidence. Not even a response to legitimate inquiries from my lawyers.' In an interview in The Guardian, she said: 'I'm yet to see a summons … I'm supposedly days away from a showcase trial in a foreign country, and I still don't know what the charges are. 'I feel a bit like I'm trapped in this Kafkaesque nightmare where I've been put on trial and I genuinely haven't found out what the allegations are.' The ACC's prosecutor, Muhammad Tariqul Islam, said Bangladeshi authorities had served notices on each of the accused, instructing them to appear before the court as the trial began. 'If any of them want to contest the allegations, they must appear before the court,' he told reporters outside the courtroom. None of those accused has engaged counsel to represent them at the trial. Prosecutors have separately disputed Siddiq's claims not to have Bangladeshi citizenship, claiming they have unearthed her Bangladeshi passport and identity card. In 2017 she said: 'I am not Bangladeshi.' Asked about her nationality, Mohammad Sultan Mahmud, another ACC prosecutor, said all necessary documents relating to Siddiq and her family would be produced during the trial. Siddiq's lawyers, from Stephenson Harwood, denied that such documents existed and said that she has not had a Bangladeshi passport since she was a child. The MP for Hampstead & Highgate has always denied wrongdoing and accused the Bangladeshi authorities of a 'targeted and baseless' campaign against her. 'I'm collateral damage, because of this feud between Muhammad Yunus and my aunt,' she said. 'These are wider forces that I'm battling against.' She resigned from the Labour frontbench after referring herself to the ministerial standards adviser after reports that she had lived in London properties with links to Hasina. Siddiq had initially claimed that a £650,000 flat in King's Cross in London was given to her by her parents. It later transpired, however, that the flat had been paid for by a developer and associate of figures in the Awami League, Hasina's party.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
UK could fail to meet commitment to spend 80% of foreign aid on gender equality projects
Ministers are considering scrapping a commitment to spend 80% of foreign aid on projects supporting gender equality, the Guardian has learned. Critics warned the move could worsen the impact of Donald Trump's rollback of funding for diversity and aid projects abroad, which has affected maternal and reproductive health services in developing countries. The Conservative government committed in 2023 to ensuring that 80% of the Foreign Office's bilateral aid programmes have a focus on gender equality by 2030. Labour ministers reaffirmed the commitment earlier this year. Stephen Doughty, a junior Foreign Office minister, said ministers would continue to work towards the target in March, even after the government had announced it was cutting international aid from 0.5% to 0.3% of GDP to spend more on defence. Under the target, 80% of aid spending must go to programmes that have gender as a component by 2030, though it does not need to be the main focus. David Lammy, the foreign secretary, told MPs last month that he could not 'commit to decisions made by the last government' and it was 'for us to look at this afresh'. The government spent £15.3bn in aid in 2023, the latest year for which final figures are available. Of this, £10bn was bilateral aid spent directly on projects in developing countries, instead of multilateral institutions such as the UN. Provisional figures suggest that the UK's aid spending fell to £14.1bn in 2024, an 8% decrease on the previous year, with £11.3bn going to bilateral aid. A government impact assessment said in July that the government's aid cuts meant that in Africa – where half of the UK's bilateral aid goes – spending was being reduced in women's health and emergency response in countries including the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Zimbabwe and Mozambique. The assessment warned that 'reductions to health spending risk an increase in disease burden and ultimately in deaths, impacting in particular those living in poverty, women, children and people with disabilities'. It also said that there would be cuts to girls' education programmes in countries including Ethiopia, Sierra Leone and Nigeria and to projects encouraging women's participation in peace processes, with specific conflicts including Ukraine and Sudan supported at a reduced scale. Critics warned that scrapping the 80% commitment could compound the impact of the US and UK aid cuts and exacerbate what feels like 'a global war on women'. Labour has promised to prioritise women and girls in government including by promoting sexual and reproductive health and rights abroad, and tackling gender-based violence. Harriet Harman, the former acting Labour leader, was appointed UK special envoy for women and girls in March 2025. Sarah Champion, the Labour chair of the international aid committee, said: 'The UK's commitments to women and girls are not just words on a page, they're a lifeline that gives hope to some of the poorest and most vulnerable on the planet. 'The Trump administration immediately cut all international maternal and reproductive health support, and just last month, burned contraception it had bought for low-income countries. Now is the time for the UK to step up our commitment to gender programming, not step away. 'When we look at conflicts, climate impact and nutrition it is always women and girls who bear the brunt. Our aid programming gives them hope and opportunities in what feels like a global war on women. We can't take that away from them now.' Alex Farley, a policy manager at Bond, the UK network for NGOs, said that 'at a time when women's rights globally are under attack and the US has been gutting all gender equality and diversity programming, it's definitely very worrying to see the UK following suit.' 'Gender equality programming has already been put at disproportionate risk in the government's cuts to UK aid. Upholding the 80% commitment, alongside stand-alone gender programmes, is really important for the UK to send a signal showing that it's committed to tackling gender inequality rather than stepping back.' Amelia Whitworth, head of policy, campaigns and youth at Plan International UK said: 'Anti-gender movements are growing, humanitarian and climate crises are intensifying, and girls and women are being hit hardest. In a world where girls' rights are being rolled back, the UK has to hold the line. 'With USAID slashing over 80% of its programmes – including funding for gender and DEI initiatives – and European donors retreating, the need for the UK to uphold its gender equality commitments has never been greater.' An FCDO spokesperson confirmed that the government was 'carefully reviewing the viability of existing commitments' after cutting aid spending to 0.3%. 'As the foreign secretary has said, women and girls are a fundamental priority,' the spokesperson said. 'From appointing a dedicated special envoy for women and girls to improving energy access for 15 million women worldwide, the UK has demonstrated how integrating gender equality into its international work can transform lives. We will continue to champion the rights of women and girls globally and ensure that gender equality is embedded across all the department's priorities.'
