logo
Britain is heading for utter ruin, and neither the parties nor the voters are prepared to stop it

Britain is heading for utter ruin, and neither the parties nor the voters are prepared to stop it

Yahoo24-05-2025

What a dreadful week. For the first time, I find myself wondering whether there will be anything left to salvage. I don't mean for Sir Keir Starmer. No, I mean for Britain.
Everything that elevated us above the run of nations is being lost: our competitiveness, our sovereignty, our credit-worthiness, our prestige. We are diminished morally, financially and, after the Chagos surrender, physically.
At the start of the week, a different future looked possible. Labour had put the Chagos deal on hold, reluctant to hand billions of pounds to a foreign government while cutting benefits at home. There was talk of how, under the influence of his no-nonsense enforcers, Pat McFadden and Morgan McSweeney, Starmer was becoming more sensitive to voters. Just as the foreign aid budget had been cut to increase defence spending, so we were told to expect hard-edged policies on immigration, net zero and welfare.
But, when the moment came, Labour returned to its comfort zone. Instead of cancelling the payments to Mauritius, it cancelled its sole attempt to trim the benefits bill, namely the removal of the winter fuel allowance from all but the poorest pensioners.
At that moment, any hopes of a more fiscally responsible Labour Government dissolved. All those briefings to the effect that Labour would act where the Tories lacked public trust – cracking down on bogus sicknotes, ending the state's monolithic control of healthcare – were exposed as wishful thinking. When push came to shove, Labour would not challenge the prejudices of its core constituency.
That core constituency is no longer the working class. Rather, it is what we might call the perking class, made up of those who depend directly or indirectly on state handouts: quangocrats, BBC employees, civil servants, human rights lawyers, white-collar shop stewards. A subset of the perking class is the shirking class: people who will vote against any party that makes it tougher to get signed off work.
If Labour could not slow, even slightly, the ballooning of the state pensions bill, we can forget about Liz Kendall's benefits cuts. The pensioners who would have lost their winter fuel payments were largely Tories. The working-age people who watch YouTube videos on how to qualify for invalidity payments are Labour.
Here was a vision of the next four years: a Labour Government prepared to spill the cash in every direction while doing nothing to generate more wealth. Mauritius was paid to take over territory that it had already been paid for renouncing. The EU was paid for graciously taking over our food standards – just in time for its trade war with the US, our chief export destination. Meanwhile, the welfare bill continued to grow.
We are heading for national penury. Labour is not just expanding the state, giving pay rises to its public-sector friends while making their work-from-home arrangements permanent. It is simultaneously driving taxpayers to less punitive jurisdictions.
Ministers seem not to understand why there might be a problem with pushing out a millionaire every 45 minutes. Leftist commentators positively cheered when it was reported that Britain had suffered the largest fall in the number of billionaires since records began. But who do they imagine is picking up the departing plutocrats' share of the tax bill?
In any case, it is not just plutocrats. The real story, masked by our net immigration figures, is that we are also losing young entrepreneurs at every level. Never mind hedgies and property moguls. Beauticians, fitness instructors, IT consultants and estate agents are emigrating in pursuit of higher salaries, lower taxes and better weather.
Many nurses in the UAE's top hospitals come from Scotland, as do a lot of the doctors. Who can blame them? Their colleagues in the UK are gearing up for yet another strike because what the Government manages to squeeze from the private sector is never enough. We train medical students expensively only to watch them cross the seas for better pay and conditions – in practice, if not in theory, ending their student loan repayments.
Their places are taken by unskilled immigrants, most of whom become a net drain on the Exchequer. So the vicious cycle continues: higher tax rates, lower revenues, worse public services and a deterioration of the workforce.
What might break the cycle? The first challenge is to forge a credible opposition. I don't intend to repeat all my arguments for a Tory/Reform entente. I have been periodically making that case in these pages since last year, but few in either party want to hear it. I will simply observe that, if I were to anonymise the reactions of the two parties to the EU and Chagos deals this week, you would not be able to tell which was which. Their divisions are rooted in past grudges, not present policy. Still, let's suppose that the two Right-of-centre parties managed to form a parliamentary majority. Do they have what it takes to nudge us out of our nosedive?
To get back to the growth that we enjoyed before the massive expansion of the state under Gordon Brown, we need to cut government spending by a third. Nothing in either the Conservative or Reform programmes suggests that they are prepared for the radical solutions that the moment demands. Neither party backed Labour's mild reduction in pensioner benefits. Both theoretically favour smaller government; both oppose specific cuts.
To be fair, they are accurately representing their voters. When the condition is as serious as ours, and the treatment so unpleasant, sufferers will often cast around for quack alternatives. Angela Rayner pretends we can solve our problems through even higher taxes – taxes of the most anti-competitive sort, falling mainly on savers. Reform and the Tories pretend that we can get the savings we need from foreign aid or efficiency drives or scrapping DEI programmes.
The truth is that we need to abolish entire departments, halve the state payroll and remove the Government from swathes of public life. We need to dismantle the Blairite juridical state that prevents elected governments from implementing their promises. We need to repeal the laws on which that state rests – the Human Rights Act, the Equality Act, the Climate Change Act – and the quangos they spawned.
We need to let ministers appoint their own senior officials, and to allow the Lord Chancellor to remove activist judges. We need to overhaul the immigration system, automatically removing illegal entrants and letting them appeal against that decision only afterwards and from overseas.
We need to replace the NHS with Singapore-style individual healthcare accounts. Instead of penalising our private schools, we should be replicating their success in the state sector by introducing school vouchers. We should scrap the EU-era tariffs and regulations that, five years on, still clog up our books. We should replace the ECHR with a Bill of Rights that would restrict itself to guaranteeing our basic liberties: free speech, free association, free contract, free worship and equality before the law: no more protected characteristics.
Simply to list these things is to see how far any party or, indeed, public opinion, is from them. Even before 2020, Britain was in an authoritarian mood. Since the dreadful lockdowns, the state has become, for many, a first rather than a last resort.
An ugly phrase kept coming into my head this week: De Excidio et Conquestu Britanniae, or On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain. It was the name of a tract by a fifth- or sixth-century Welsh monk, Gildas, who chronicled the destruction of his country by the invading Anglo-Saxons. To Gildas, the barbarians were simply an instrument of divine justice. It was the sinful Britons who had brought the disaster on themselves.
Is there time to turn aside? Are we ready to vote for candidates who offer hard truths rather than sweet delusions? Are we prepared to accept that public spending is limited by the laws of scarcity, not the meanness of politicians? Perhaps. Or perhaps, like the Britons of Gildas's time, we have already left it too late.
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.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Zia Yusuf: Chairman of Reform UK resigns
Zia Yusuf: Chairman of Reform UK resigns

Yahoo

time19 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Zia Yusuf: Chairman of Reform UK resigns

The chairman of Reform UK, Zia Yusuf, has resigned. In a statement, Mr Yusuf said in a post on X that working to get the party elected is no longer "a good use of my time". He said: "11 months ago I became chairman of Reform. I've worked full time as a volunteer to take the party from 14 to 30%, quadrupled its membership and delivered historic electoral results. "I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office." Politics latest: PM dodges more questions on benefits It comes after a row in which he described a question to Sir Keir Starmer about a ban on burkas from his party's newest MP Sarah Pochin as "dumb". There have also been reports Mr Yusuf had been sidelined. Rupert Lowe, a former Reform MP, was strongly critical of Mr Yusuf in the wake of the politician's suspension following allegations that he had threatened violence towards the party chair. Many credited businessman Mr Yusuf with professionalising the party's operations as they secured millions of votes at last year's general election. Reacting to the news, party leader Nigel Farage said: "I am genuinely sorry that Zia Yusuf has decided to stand down as Reform UK chairman. "As I said just last week, he was a huge factor in our success on May 1st and is an enormously talented person. "Politics can be a highly pressured and difficult game and Zia has clearly had enough. He is a loss to us and public life." Deputy leader Richard Tice said the party would "not be where we are today without him". Mr Lowe was less complimentary. He said: "The question is - how did a man with no political experience be given such vast power within Reform? A deeply unpleasant individual who at every stage was protected and promoted by Farage." He added that he is still taking legal action against Mr Yusuf. This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the latest version. You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

What to know about Trump's new travel ban
What to know about Trump's new travel ban

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

What to know about Trump's new travel ban

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday night that nationals from 12 countries would be banned from entering the United States starting on Monday. Trump said that the ban, which primarily targets countries in Africa and the Middle East, was necessary to preserve national security and prevent terrorism in the U.S. "As President, I must act to protect the national security and national interest of the United States and its people," Trump's proclamation reads. "I remain committed to engaging with those countries willing to cooperate to improve information-sharing and identity-management procedures, and to address both terrorism-related and public-safety risks." Citizens of the following 12 countries will be blocked from entering the United States: Afghanistan, Chad, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Myanmar, the Republic of Congo, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. In addition, nationals of seven other countries will be barred from coming into the U.S. permanently or under several visa programs: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela. The executive order goes into effect Monday at 12:01 am ET. Addressing reporters at the White House on Thursday alongside German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump said he implemented the new ban now because "it can't come soon enough." "Frankly, we want to keep bad people out of our country," Trump said. A similar policy in Trump's first term, which barred foreigners from six Muslim-majority countries from entering the country, was reversed by then-President Joe Biden. On the campaign trail, Trump promised he would revive the ban. In a video posted Wednesday on YouTube, Trump cited the attack Sunday in Boulder as justification for the travel ban renewal. "The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, has underscored the extreme dangers posed to our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstay their visas," Trump said. "We don't want them." The suspect in the Boulder attack, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, is accused of using a 'makeshift flamethrower' and Molotov cocktails on a group of people peacefully calling for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza. Soliman entered the U.S. legally from Egypt in 2022 on a tourist visa, according to officials. Egypt is not one of the countries affected by the new travel ban. When asked at the White House on Thursday why Egypt was excluded from the list of restricted nations, Trump said, "Egypt has been a country that we deal with very closely." "They have things under control," he said."The countries that we have don't have things under control." Yes. The ban will not affect nationals who are already lawful permanent residents of the U.S. In other words, the proclamation will not apply to nationals from the list of banned countries who have green cards or who are living in the U.S. with a visa. It will also not affect citizens of the banned countries who have citizenship in a second country and are entering the U.S. with a passport from an unrestricted nation. Other exemptions include Afghans who helped the U.S. government during the war in Afghanistan; ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran; athletes from banned countries who are entering the U.S for the World Cup or the Olympics; and children who are being adopted. This article was originally published on

Chairman of UK's right-wing Reform party resigns
Chairman of UK's right-wing Reform party resigns

Yahoo

time38 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Chairman of UK's right-wing Reform party resigns

LONDON (Reuters) -Zia Yousuf, the chairman of Britain's right-wing Reform UK party, resigned on Thursday. Reform, led by Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage, won five parliamentary seats in a breakthrough result at last July's national election, and last month performed strongly in local elections. The party currently leads national opinion polls, ahead of Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour Party. "I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office," Yusuf said, without giving further details of the reason for his exit. Divisions in the party's upper ranks have been made public before. In March Reform referred one of its lawmakers, Rupert Lowe, to police over allegations including threats of physical violence against Yusuf. Prosecutors later said they would not bring charges against Lowe, who was suspended by the party. Earlier on Thursday, Yusuf said Reform lawmaker Sarah Pochin's question to Prime Minister Keir Starmer in parliament, asking whether the government would consider banning the burqa, was "dumb". Yusuf, who is not a lawmaker himself, became Reform chairman last year.

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