Latest news with #GovernmentPolicy
Telegraph
12-08-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Post Offices face axe under government shake-up
Post Offices across the UK are at risk as Labour considers scrapping a rule forcing ministers to protect thousands of branches. The Government is consulting on whether to axe the requirement to keep at least 11,500 Post Offices open, suggesting that a 'smaller' network could be better suited to meet 'market trends'. The minimum branch requirement was introduced by the Tory-led coalition in 2010, after Labour oversaw thousands of cuts to the network in the 2000s. Scrapping the limit is not Labour's preferred course of action, with the Government saying it would rather keep things as they are. However, it is a 'lower cost option' being considered by ministers to help achieve policy objectives. Dame Harriett Baldwin, the shadow business minister, said the review would threaten 'the future of branches nationwide', putting vital services for vulnerable people at risk. Under the proposal, the exact size of the network would become an 'operational decision' for the Post Office. However, it would still need to ensure that at least 99 per cent of the population stays within three miles of a full service branch. The Government said the Post Office would have 'more flexibility to adapt to market trends' as its resources would be 'less thinly spread'. But it acknowledged that a 'modestly smaller network' would likely be a concern to people living nearby. The consultation document said: 'As set out at the beginning of the chapter, there are already changes happening in the network to allow Post Office to make the most of opportunity in the parcels market. 'Too much change at the same time could lead to instability for Post Office as well as communities and so it might be preferable to wait to see how the network evolves in the short term before reviewing the overall size and for any longer-term changes to be phased in over time.' Instead, ministers have said they would prefer to maintain all existing requirements, with the Government continuing to subsidise loss-making branches to ensure everyone has access to a Post Office. At the beginning of the millennium, there were 18,393 Post Offices. By 2023, this had dropped to 11,684. The biggest fall was at the height of the financial crisis, between 2008 and 2009, when the total dropped by 1,615. Dame Harriett, who has been a vocal campaigner for the Post Office network, said: 'Labour's extensive Post Office review threatens the future of branches nationwide. 'And this will put vital services at risk. Especially for pensioners, rural communities, and small businesses who rely on them most. 'I've been an advocate for Post Offices, those who work there and those who rely on them all my political career. And for the last 15 years the number of Post Offices has been kept stable at 11,500. Labour are now consulting on reducing that number.' She added: 'The closure of Post Offices could once again leave pensioners, small businesses and rural communities cut off from vital services. With bank branches closing, often it's Post Offices that provide vital banking services. 'I'd encourage all Telegraph readers to respond to the Government's consultation and I've also started a petition which has already attracted 100,000 signatures.' The petition, called Save Your Post Office, urges people to push back against the potential closures.
The Independent
28-07-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Palestinian state recognition is a one shot opportunity for Starmer – but what does he want to achieve?
Keir Starmer will go into his emergency cabinet meeting this week under immense political pressure to change government policy and recognise a Palestinian state. The question which will be troubling the prime minister though will not be whether he wants to recognise Palestine as a country, but determining when formal recognition will have maximum effect. The problem is that recognising a state is a one-time move. Unlike a Brexit agreement or a trade deal, there is no going back to rework some of the details further down the line – with this, there is no room for error. That means for Sir Keir to do it he has to be sure it will achieve the goals he wants. The issue will be whether solving a political problem is more important than using it to achieve peace. Current policy The current policy is to support a two-state solution and to recognise a Palestinian state as part of the peace process - without specifying when this would be. Sir Keir has gone further and said in a strongly worded statement on Thursday that a Palestinian state is 'an inalienable right' of the Palestinian people. For some this was taken as a strong hint that he is edging closer to actual formal recognition. The reason it is important is that once a state is formally recognised, it gains diplomatic status and can in theory be recognised by international bodies – so the move would not be purely symbolic. Added to that, the UK's historic status as the former colonial power which effectively created the modern state of Israel through the Balfour Declaration gives recognising a Palestinian state added symbolic weight. Political pressure President Emmanuel Macron's decision on Friday to announce that France would be the first G7 country to recognise Palestinian statehood has ramped up pressure on Sir Keir to follow suit. Already his cabinet is split over the issue, with figures like justice secretary Shabana Mahmood and deputy prime minister Angela Rayner pushing for recognition, while others like chancellor Rachel Reeves are more sceptical of an early move. Recognition is backed by a clear majority in the Labour Party though, and Jeremy Corbyn's new party on the left – which has made Israel- Palestine its primary policy area – adds even more pressure. With more than 200 MPs from nine different parties signing a letter backing the proposition there is also clearly an appetite for it in Westminster. But weighing on the other side is Labour Friends of Israel (LFI), which is a group made more powerful by the need within Labour to repair the damage of the antisemitism which was allowed to flourish under Corbyn's leadership. It also has the support of a number of senior cabinet members. LFI backs a two-state solution and eventual recognition of a Palestinian state but warns that if the UK goes for recognition early, it will waste an opportunity to maximise the effect. All about Trump Over the weekend minister James Murray pointed out that 140 countries have recognised a Palestinian state, but it has had no effect on the peace process. There is a sense that it will destroy what is left of the UK's dwindling influence with Israel, although given Benjamin Netanyahu's attitude to international criticism that ship may have already sailed. The problem is that US secretary of state Marco Rubio was very critical of France's statement last week, and there was speculation that Starmer did not want to broach the recognition question until he had his bilateral with Donald Trump in Scotland out of the way first. But the UK government now seems to understand that the only way to get Israel back in line and for the peace process to restart is for Trump's administration to force everyone's hand. There is a danger that if he goes ahead with recognition of a Palestinian state, he may lose that last bit of influence he has on the White House. But in the end Sir Keir is a prime minister respected abroad but losing control at home. He may decide that the political problems recognition solves domestically are worth doing it even if it has little or no impact on the peace process.
The Independent
15-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Speaker urges Government to apologise for not taking Ministerial Code seriously
The Speaker of the House of Commons has urged Government ministers to apologise for not taking the Ministerial Code 'seriously'. For the second time this month, Sir Lindsay Hoyle berated ministers in the chamber for making policy announcements to the media, instead of to Parliament. In a heated statement, Sir Lindsay criticised ministers for having to be dragged to the Commons, and said MPs should not be taken for granted. It comes after Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood conducted a press conference on changes to prison recall measures, just an hour after MPs raised concerns in the Commons about the Government's repeated media briefings. Trade minister Douglas Alexander also received a telling-off from the Speaker last week, after he suggested a statement on the UK-US trade deal should be delayed, despite one being scheduled. Speaking in the Commons on Thursday, Sir Lindsay said MPs should be able to question ministers 'in person' on the 'most important announcements' of Government policy. He said: 'Once again I've had to grant an urgent question on a matter which was briefed extensively to the media in recent days, I recognise the written ministerial statement was issued but I'm surprised that the Government did not think that members will want an opportunity to question ministers on a very important issue. 'On Monday, the Home Secretary was unapologetic about the fact that details of the immigration White Paper were given to the media, which started Sunday morning, before it was laid before this House, and long before she came to make her statement. 'I note that those who now occupy senior ministerial roles were not slow to complain when the previous government made major policy announcements outside this place. 'I will continue to uphold and defend the rights of this House, the right of backbenchers to be here and hear it first.' He added: 'That was my position on the previous government and it has not changed under this Government. It is clear to me that the general principle set out in paragraph 9.1 of the Ministerial Code is being disregarded more often than it is observed. 'I will be writing to the chair of the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee to invite that committee to consider the issues in more detail. 'Because if the Government is not going to take the ministerial policies seriously, who will? 'I've got to say, I don't like doing this. I believe I am here to represent all backbenchers, and backbenchers have the right to question ministers first. I'm not interested in Sky News or the BBC or political programmes. I'm here to defend all of you, I will continue to defend you. 'Please, do not take MPs for granted, it is not acceptable. I know it's not the minister's fault, but the message has got to go back loud and clear. 'And when you're in the wrong, try apologising to the members we represent.' Justice minister Sir Nicholas Dakin was in the chamber to respond to an urgent question on the changes to prison recall measures, which had been tabled by shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick. Sir Nicholas said: 'I hear very clearly your words, and I very much respect the role of Parliament and I'm pleased to be here today to follow up the written ministerial statement that was laid yesterday by the Lord Chancellor.' Intervening, Sir Lindsay said: 'You wouldn't be here if I hadn't have granted the urgent question. That's the thing we should remember, you wouldn't be here at all. 'It's only because I have decided you should be here, so please let's not try and take advantage of a situation that's your own making.' Sir Nicholas then said: 'Certainly apologise Mr Speaker, I wasn't trying to take advantage. And clearly it did mean the action of (Mr Jenrick) opposite as well to lay an urgent question, and that's how Parliament works, and rightly so.' Sir Lindsay said: 'No, it's not the way we should be acting. The way we should be acting is that the statement should have been brought here on the day that it was announced. 'Let's get this very, very clear, this is not about having to grant an urgent question, this is about the Government doing the right thing, rather than somebody else having to drag the ministers here.' Sir Nicholas said: 'I'm sorry for any misinformation that I've given in trying to begin this urgent question.' Sir Lindsay could be heard saying 'you're a nice person', before Sir Nicholas went on to say: 'Thank you Mr Speaker, we respect each other and I respect very much that you are standing up for Parliament which is exactly the right thing to do and I applaud.' On Wednesday, SNP MP Kirsty Blackman argued 'there is little point in having a Ministerial Code' if it continues to be ignored by the Government. Responding to the MP for Aberdeen North's urgent question, Commons Leader Lucy Powell said: 'There are judgments to be made and there is a balance to be struck at times, and I do do this with the best interests of the House in mind.'
