Labour narrows the gap on Reform after PM's full-frontal attack on Nigel Farage - but insurgents still hold six-point poll lead
Labour has narrowed the gap on Reform after Keir Starmer 's extraordinary full-frontal attack.
The latest YouGov poll shows the advantage for Nigel Farage 's party trimmed by two points compared to last week.
But despite Reform losing a point and Labour gaining one, the lead still stands at six points.
Sir Keir summoned a press conference during the Parliamentary recess to condemn Mr Farage's economic plans.
He warned voters they cannot trust Reform with their 'future, mortgages or jobs', deriding proposals for huge tax cuts and higher spending.
The intervention confirmed a major shift in Labour's tactics, from largely ignoring Reform to targeting their rivals head-on,
Mr Farage has sought to woo working class Labour voters by backing an end to the two-child benefit cap and full restoration of winter fuel payments.
But he simultaneously insists he can slash taxes, with economists suggesting a commitment to hike the personal allowance alone would cost £60billion to £80billion.
Reform argues that would be possible by cutting £350billion-£400billion of spending on quangos, Net Zero and DEI policies - although Mr Farage himself acknowledged the figures could be 'slightly optimistic'.
The YouGov research put Reform on 28 per cent, with Labour on 22 per cent, and the Conservatives barely ahead of the Lib Dems on 18 per cent.
Panic has grown in Labour circles following the dramatic local election results, when Reform seized 10 councils, two mayoralties and the Parliamentary seat of Runcorn in a by-election.
Sir Keir has signalled he will bow to a revolt by MPs over scrapping the winter fuel allowance, as well as easing the two-child benefit cap.
But he is under pressure to go further and water down curbs to disability benefits, despite the government desperately struggling to balance the books.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
UK MPs call for ban on bottom trawling in protected marine areas
Ministers must ban bottom trawling for fish in marine protected areas, an influential group of MPs has said, because the destructive practice is devastating the seabed and marine life. The UK parliament's environmental audit committee called for a ban to encompass dredging and mining as well as the bottom trawling of fish in the 900,000 sq km covered by nearly 180 marine protected areas. Despite the name, these areas are open for many sorts of fishing, including bottom trawling – the practice of dragging immense and heavy nets across the seabed to scoop up all in their path, most of which is discarded while prized fish such as sole, cod and haddock are kept. 'Bottom trawling and scallop dredging are the most damaging forms of fishing,' said Jonny Hughes, senior policy manager at the Blue Marine Foundation thinktank and charity. 'They devastate the seabed and have amongst the highest rates of bycatch of any fishing method – most of this is simply thrown away. It is absurd and misleading to call any part of the ocean that allows these activities protected.' Campaigners have been calling for years for a ban, but public outcry has intensified since a film by Sir David Attenborough was released last month, to coincide with his 99th birthday. The film, Ocean – which was released in cinemas and will be available on streaming services in June – showed in detail some of the vital habitats raked by the massive nets that in effect plough up the seabed, leaving deep scars where it can take many years for marine life to recover. Toby Perkins, the chair of the Commons committee, said: 'Ministers must ensure that marine protected areas live up to their name. [They] have all the information they need to press ahead with banning bottom trawling in the offshore protected areas where it presents the most risk. Why the delay? Our oceans cannot afford any more prevarication. It is time to act.' The UK will send representatives to a UN oceans conference later this month. Ministers have previously indicated they could take action, and there are protections in place against damaging fishing practices in about 60% of the current marine protected areas but no full ban has yet been brought in. A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: 'Our precious marine animals and habitats have been under threat for too long. This government is committed to protecting and restoring our oceans to good health.'
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Survey of Labour Muslim MPs shows extent of disquiet over Gaza stance
Labour is facing calls for action from a large group of its Muslim MPs, councillors and mayors, who believe Keir Starmer is mishandling the crisis in Gaza. In the first-ever survey of the party's Muslim representatives, 77% of respondents said they believed the government should end all UK arms exports to Israel and 84% supported sanctions against the Israeli government, the Labour Muslim Network (LMN) said. Nearly all respondents – 97% – said they supported the immediate recognition of the state of Palestine. The results are based on an online questionnaire circulated by the LMN between 2 April and 16 May. There were 221 respondents out of 477 eligible Labour Muslim MPs, councillors and elected mayors. The findings lay bare the political difficulties the government faces over its response to the war between Israel and Hamas and the continuing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. Starmer told the Commons on Wednesday that Gaza was facing 'dark days' and he vowed to consider 'further action'. Last month the government suspended free trade talks with Israel and hit West Bank settlers with sanctions. Ministers have come under pressure to recognise Palestine as a state jointly with France this month. More than 140 UN countries including Spain, Ireland and Norway recognise the Palestinian state, but the UK doing so would be of major significance given that the region was under British control until 1948. Labour committed in its manifesto to recognising a Palestinian state as part of a peace process resulting in a two-state solution. The government has also been considering imposing sanctions against two hard-right Israeli ministers, Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir. The third lever that ministers have at their disposal is the export of arms to Israel, although according to government figures less than 1% of Israel's defence imports come from the UK. In the autumn, David Lammy, the foreign secretary, suspended 30 arms export licenses, from a total of 350. Campaigners and charities have launched a judicial review over allegations that the government acted unlawfully in continuing to sell F-35 parts and components to a global pool, when some of those components might be used by Israel in Gaza in a way that the government regards as a breach of international law. Labour MPs on the left of the party called for stronger action in the Commons on Wednesday. Hamish Falconer, the minister for the Middle East, said Israel's newly introduced measures for aid delivery in Gaza were 'inhumane, foster desperation and endanger civilians'. He said: 'We are appalled by repeated reports of mass casualty incidents in which Palestinians have been killed when trying to access aid sites in Gaza. Desperate civilians who have endured 20 months of war should never face the risk of death or injury to simply feed themselves and their families. We call for an immediate and independent investigation into these events for the perpetrators to be held to account.' In March, Lammy told the Commons he believed Israel had broken international law by blocking aid to Gaza, but a day later he was contradicted by Downing Street. The war in Gaza cost Labour votes in areas with large Muslim communities in the election last summer, particularly after an LBC interview in which Starmer appeared to say Israel had the right to withhold water and electricity in Gaza. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Pro-Gaza independents defeated Labour candidates in Dewsbury and Batley, Blackburn, Birmingham Perry Barr and Leicester South and came close in several other constituencies, including Wes Streeting's Ilford North. The LMN survey found that 58% of Labour Muslim representatives thought the government had represented British Muslims badly so far. The results also recorded dissatisfaction with the Labour party, with 66% of those surveyed saying they did not believe Muslim representatives were treated equally compared with others in the party. A third of Muslim Labour representatives said they had directly experienced Islamophobia and more than half said they did not believe the party took Islamophobia seriously. A spokesperson for the LMN said its report was a 'call to action' for 'a renewed commitment to Muslim representation, rooted in equality and justice'. 'Our Labour party cannot credibly claim to be an anti-racist movement while ignoring the testimonies and experiences of its own Muslim elected officials,' they said. A Labour party spokesperson said: 'The Labour party is proud of the diversity of our party, including the increase in the number of Muslim MPs in the parliamentary Labour party and having the first Muslim lord chancellor in Shabana Mahmood, and the first Muslim mayor of London in Sadiq Khan. 'We are the party of equality and we take any complaints of discrimination, including Islamophobia, seriously. All complaints are assessed in line with our complaints policies and procedures through our independent complaints system.'
The Guardian
9 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Why is defence such a hard sell? The same reason Starmer is struggling in the polls
Defence reviews and foreign policy resets seem to turn up almost as often as the Sussexes' lifestyle brand relaunches these days. Labour's strategic defence review this week comes less than two years after the Conservatives' hardly less detailed defence white paper in July 2023, which in turn was a 'refresh' of Boris Johnson's ambitious integrated review of defence and foreign policy of March 2021. By this measure, it must be doubtful if, come the 2030s, analysts will look back on Keir Starmer and John Healey's review and say it broke the mould. The Labour government was entitled to try to put its own stamp on defence policy, of course, and its review team of George Robertson, Richard Barrons and Fiona Hill did a good, reasonably independent job. Yet this 2020s pattern of repeated strategic adaptation and refocus feels like the new normal now. It is also true that grand strategy does not often survive prolonged contact with the real world. In wartime, as the US general, later president, Dwight Eisenhower once put it, plans are useless but planning is essential. Today, though, war is no longer an academic possibility. So defence policy must adapt afresh, and at pace. Labour's defence review does not always do this convincingly. Most of the imperatives and innovations of the day revolve around resisting the threat from Russia and adapting to the new weaponry of the drone and cyber age. At times, though, this is hard to reconcile with the review's dogged assumption that the transatlantic alliance will remain the bedrock of that resistance. Johnson's 2021 review aimed to recast British foreign policy in the light of Brexit. In some ways, like Johnson's delusional British tilt towards Asia, it represents a worldview that has gone with the wind. In others, especially on Russia, it describes a conflict that still confronts Starmer today. Yet Johnson's review came out as Covid was starting to upend the global economy and before Russia invaded Ukraine. The 2023 refresh took those newer convulsions on board but could not, in its turn, know about the most recent disruption: Donald Trump's return. It is pathetic and shameful that Trump's name does not appear once throughout the new defence review's 140 pages. Its absence reflects Labour's – and London's – bred-in-the-bone fear of offending the US president. Even so, it cannot disguise that this is a defence review for Britain in an age of greater US isolationism. Trump's unreliability and his administration's manifest contempt for Europe cast a long shadow over the whole document and over the government's determination, even in the context of next week's Whitehall spending review, to prioritise defence in line with Nato urgings. Since history never stops, this week's review may itself soon look out of date. Events may grab hold of the steering wheel at any time. China may invade Taiwan, for example, or Russia turn up the heat in the Baltic or against Moldova. Iran may finally test a nuclear weapon. Trump may annex Greenland. Even the ending of the Ukraine war, not just its continuation as before, would necessitate a big course correction and reshifting of priorities for British policy too. If there is a thread running through the document, it is that 21st-century Britain is a big, but not a global power, whose security priority lies in Europe, not elsewhere. The overriding goals for British defence policy are thus, as always, to defend the nation against direct threats, and to make the necessary contribution to the maintenance of peace, freedom and commerce on the European continent. Brexit did not change that. But it was a dramatic illustration of how easy it is to delude a nation that there are magic answers to grindingly difficult problems. It is a mistake, however, to seek blind refuge in the belief that the world has always been a conflicted and messy place, and therefore to assume that 2025 is merely another unfortunate iteration of it. This may indeed be true in a very long view sense. But it does not adequately explain why 21st century governments in many liberal democracies – not least in Britain – struggle to mobilise national support to bring about almost any big and effective change, not just in defence policy but domestically. It is not enough to blame Russia alone for the suffering in Ukraine, or to denounce the United States uniquely for turning its back on European security – even though both are hugely culpable. Part of the problem also lies closer to home. The issue is that while the liberal democratic nation state is the only meaningful game in town, it is no longer delivering what it once seemed uniquely capable of providing for its people. The run-down of defence following the end of the cold war is merely one example of this widely felt failure, albeit an important one. One can select others from most areas of national life. They range from not embracing the digital revolution sufficiently to help rebuild British industry and education, through the failure to prioritise the care of an increasingly ageing population and the cynical depletion of parts of the welfare state, to the shameful pollution of rivers and lakes, the disdain for localism and the wilful neglect of national culture. The results of this are inescapably wounding to politics itself. The most striking thing that has happened in the last 11 months is that Labour has managed to turn an election victory into what looks increasingly likely to be an election defeat when the time comes. Why has this happened? Not because Starmer and his ministers are bad people, or because they have bad values or even bad policies. Certainly not because voters want the Conservatives back. It has happened because liberal democratic governments are no longer able to command the necessary sustained public confidence, even through rocky times, to deliver what people once instinctively looked to them for. That was true of the defence review this week, which was launched on to a sea of scepticism about Labour's ability to pay for its plans. It will be even more true of the spending review in a few days' time. The strands that once meaningfully bound people together within a shared national framework are weaker now. They may not be irreparable. But repairing them requires a lot of humility as well as much determination and a sprinkling of genius. There are no quick answers and it is a massively hard task. Martin Kettle is a Guardian columnist
