Latest news with #JohnMcDonnell
The Guardian
4 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Is John McDonnell's criticism of Keir Starmer's Labour fair?
John McDonnell clearly takes responsibility, along with Jeremy Corbyn, for the 'policy platform' they developed together in the hope that 'eventually Labour would return to power' (Starmer and co are trashing Labour's legacy. We must take back control of our party – before it's too late, 28 May). Throughout his article, McDonnell argues for an alternative strategy to that being followed by the current prime minister, Keir Starmer. At no stage does he acknowledge that, when standing on this Corbyn/McDonnell policy platform, Labour lost two general elections. By losing these elections they condemned this country to seven years of Tory rule – seven years during which the Tories wreaked havoc. Yet I note that not once in his piece does McDonnell offer any kind of apology for these years of mayhem. Starmer is at least attempting to put this right. He changed the party's policies in order to make it more electable, and he was (thankfully) successful. Now let him get on and finish the job. Passing 'control' back to McDonnell and his sidekicks will merely send Labour back into the SoperMidhurst, West Sussex John McDonnell has identified Labour's malaise, which, he reminds us, affects not just its members in No 10 (hubris) but the entire movement (disillusionment). Almost a year ago seven MPs – including him – were suspended when they voted against maintaining the two-child cap on benefits, and after Labour's recent U-turn we can only look forward, in hope, to their reinstatement. But, as he warns us, we face a looming crisis. He is right to characterise how Labour is governing as 'timid'. Its tone-deaf acceptance of corporate gifting was dismissed as trivial sniping by the left. Try citing that as an excuse when attempting to retain support on the doorstep and being met with 'they're all the same' while those desperate for change look over your shoulder at Reform. The number of MPs who vote with the government, or abstain, when it attempts to cut disabled people's benefits will be a measure of how deeply unwell the party has Peter ManganBeckenham, Kent John McDonnell's criticism of the Labour government may well be music to the receptive ears of people frustrated by a lack of progress on many issues of concern to those in the labour movement and beyond in these still early days of Starmer's government. I'm reminded of the early years of Tony Blair's government, during which so many felt frustrated with progress. But look at how that changed and bore fruit, to the extent that by 2010 Labour was deemed an overspending, reckless, leftish government. In 2010, in the dog days of Gordon Brown's tenure, I recall sharing a platform with John McDonnell, who castigated Brown as a rightwing monetarist who had failed the labour movement and the people. What we would all give to have those levels of social spending now. Trevor HopperLewes, East Sussex Like John McDonnell, I am in my 70s, a lifelong Labour voter, and I have been a member of the party for more than 40 years. I would just note that every Labour government in my lifetime, including the great Attlee government, has been accused of betrayal and abandoning principles, mainly by people who claim to be on the left. I would also note that, despite the criticisms, it is Labour governments that have delivered almost every social advance and economic improvement in the lives of ordinary British voters over those more than seven GallagherLargs, North Ayrshire Bridget Phillipson says it is the moral mission 'of this Labour government to ensure that fewer children grow up in poverty' (Report, 27 May). What's with 'fewer'? Shouldn't it be that no children grow up in poverty, or am I missing something?Simon Lauris Hudson Pontefract, West Yorkshire Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The threat to Starmer may come from the Left
Politicians are adrift. They don't know how to tell people the truth without frightening the horses – and perhaps it's not surprising. Countries with ageing populations, low growth and high migration are unhappy ones, especially if, like Britain, they are running a trade deficit, debt at nearly 100 per cent of GDP, and a budget deficit all at once. We spend more on servicing our debt than on defence. This is unsustainable. Sooner rather than later, the bailiffs will come with the bill. Enter Labour. Its solution to these problems, during last year's election campaign, was a single word: change. Or, to put it another way, throw out the Conservatives. Once they've gone, renewal can begin. Not just because Labour values are better than Tory ones, but because Labour people are, too. Nicer, kinder, gentler, they would – by their mere presence in government – generate national recovery. The result was spectacular: Labour won 411 seats. Two hundred and thirty one of those MPs were new to Parliament – over half. Now imagine yourself as one of them – elected, as you saw it, to distribute ever-larger subsidies to your grateful constituents (paid for by the taxes of those who don't vote for you). First of all, you were ordered, in the wake of your triumph at the polls, to tramp through the lobbies in support of the two-child benefit cap – and told that if you didn't, you would lose the whip. Next, only a few days later, came the news that this new Labour Government would cut the winter fuel allowance. Finally, some six months later, it was announced that £5 billion would be saved annually from the welfare bill by measures including reassessments for incapacity benefits for those capable of work, and the focusing of some disability benefits on those with higher needs. Your response would doubtless be – as many of theirs surely was – to look hard at yourself in the mirror. Did you really come into Parliament for this? To boost child poverty, let needy pensioners freeze and take away support from disabled people? Enter John McDonnell, once Jeremy Corbyn's shadow chancellor. Like Corbyn, he's a man of the hard Left. Unlike him, he won his seat in Hayes and Harlington under the Labour banner last year, only to lose the whip a few weeks later for voting against the two-child benefit cap. Earlier this week, he surfaced to call for a change of leadership: 'Unless party members, affiliated unions and MPs stand up and assert themselves to take back control of Labour … we may not only lose a government. We could also lose a party.' McDonnell is an old stager who has been active in the Labour movement for most of his adult life, has sat in Parliament for over a quarter of a century, and is marinated in the arcana of the party's rulebook, trade union networks and culture. He has nothing to lose and an acute sense of timing: shark-like, he can smell blood in the water. Last week, Sir Keir Starmer conceded that the winter fuel allowance cuts will be ameliorated. Don't know where, don't know when – but it will happen. This looked rushed. And it was. The classic means of executing a U-turn is to reverse the original decision: humiliating, certainly; expensive, usually – but at least closing down the problem (whatever it may have been) and moving events on. Instead, speculation will now run on: how many pensioners will gain from concessions? What will they be? How many will still lose out? The same destabilising process is at work over the two-child benefit cap. Sir Keir now says that Labour will 'look at all options, always, of driving down child poverty'. He is caught in a trap of his own devising. By campaigning on the basis of change – but without a worked-through conception of what the change would be – Labour sacrificed depth for breadth. An Old Labour-type plan would have won the party fewer seats, but given it a clearer mandate. A New Labour-style plan might well have achieved the same. Instead, Sir Keir finds himself with New Labour-flavoured fiscal rules but Old Labour spending commitments. Something has to give. As it does, Labour will move further Left – under pressure from greens, independents, Islamists and the instincts of his own MPs. No wonder Angela Rayner, burnishing her own leadership credentials, is proposing further tax rises. And, let's face it, McDonnell has a point: 'The public got view of the distasteful sight of Labour ministers accepting gifts, tickets and donations from the rich and corporate carpetbaggers,' he wrote. There's the rub. Labour people are no less vain, weak and vulnerable than anyone else – a lesson for its MPs to take to heart, as public contempt threatens to overwhelm them. Lord Goodman of Wycombe is a senior fellow at Policy Exchange 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.
The Guardian
6 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
John McDonnell calls for grassroots leadership challenge to Starmer's government
The suspended Labour veteran John McDonnell has called for a grassroots leadership challenge to the Labour government , warning that unless party members, unions and MPs 'stand up and assert themselves to take back control of our party', Labour risks losing not just its power: 'We could lose a party.' The former shadow chancellor accused Keir Starmer's government of 'callousness and political incompetence', criticising its hesitance in abolishing the two-child limit on benefits, and what he calls a 'brutal launch of an attack on benefits of disabled people'. Writing for the Guardian five decades after joining Labour as a young trade unionist, McDonnell said the movement he had devoted his life to had 'instigated a series of policies that fly like a knife to the heart of what we believed the Labour party above all else stood for when we joined the party'. 'When in the first king's speech the Starmer leadership didn't just fail to address the major cause of child poverty, the two-child benefit cap, but demanded Labour MPs vote against its abolition, the first signs of the callousness and political incompetency of the decision-making of the new administration were put on display,' he wrote. McDonnell was among seven Labour MPs suspended last July for defying the whip on a Commons vote to end the two-child limit – a policy that continues to cause anger across Labour's benches – leaving many MPs ready to use the welfare-related vote expected in the coming weeks to express their discontent. Labour's decision to delay the release of its long-awaited child poverty strategy until autumn has left some MPs feeling relieved, but many feeling further angered given experts have warned more children will continue to be pushed into poverty every day the policy exists. McDonnell highlights what he sees as an erosion of Labour's founding mission. 'We are the party founded to eliminate poverty and secure equality,' he said, but instead he added, 'the distasteful sight of Labour ministers accepting gifts and tickets and donations from the rich and corporate carpet baggers whilst cutting the benefits of the poorest in our society was justifiably nauseating for many of our supporters.' 'To then follow this up with the debacle of the winter fuel allowance and the brutal launch of an attack on benefits of disabled people has disillusioned our supporters on a scale not seen before in the recent history of our party'. The U-turn on universal winter fuel support, which initially excluded millions of pensioners on modest incomes, followed internal backlash and a local elections drubbing. But McDonnell argued the government's direction had already 'opened the door to the divisive and destructive proto fascism of Farage'. Going even further, McDonnell launched a cutting assessment of Starmer's inner circle, claiming a full-blown power struggle was already under way. 'What we are now witnessing is a panicked half-hearted policy retreat whilst the back room boys, Morgan McSweeney in the leader's office and Nick Parrot in the deputy leader's office, fight like rats in a sack for the succession to Keir Starmer.' Downing Street heavily pushed back against MPs' criticism of Starmer's recent immigration speech, rejecting the direct comparison with Enoch Powell but saying the prime minister would not 'shy away' from direct talk about the subject. The government is preparing for a June spending review, with pressure from Labour backbenchers and trade unions to introduce a wealth tax and reverse planned welfare cuts. The leadership has so far resisted those calls, but McDonnell's intervention will be read by Labour insiders as a direct call for Starmer's ousting if he does not. 'Unless the party members, our affiliated unions and members of the parliamentary Labour party stand up and assert themselves to take back control of our party, in the next period, in the Labour party's history we may not just lose a government, we could lose a party', he said.
Spectator
21-05-2025
- Business
- Spectator
Starmer vs the workers: the real Brexit betrayal
Keir Starmer looked blank. The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, seemed confused. Only the old Stalinist Seumas Milne seemed really to understand. It was 2019. Labour's front bench team, and their leader Jeremy Corbyn's close advisers, were being upbraided – from the left. Why were they putting the interests of international capital ahead of our workers? Why were they abandoning the chance to implement a meaningful industrial policy? Why were they giving up on the chance to save British steel, to give all support necessary to our manufacturing sector, to make a stand against neo-liberalism? The person in the room making the challenge, over ginger beer and sandwiches, was not Owen Jones, James O'Brien or Mick Lynch. It was me. The occasion was one of the ill-fated talks between Labour and the government in the last days of Theresa May's premiership. Our failure to command enough Conservative votes to get a Brexit deal through parliament had driven the cabinet to see if compromise was possible with the opposition. It was never likely to be. But the government was running out of time, opportunities and indeed ministers, so one last throw was attempted. Most of the time I kept uncharacteristically schtum, except for one moment when the tragically limited, anaemically timid, intellectually impoverished, morally pusill-animous, pre-emptively cringing nature of Labour's position provoked me. Starmer was once again laying down Labour's 'red lines'. To nods from his colleagues, he stressed how important it was to be in the European Union's single market. In other words, to accept that a newly sovereign Britain could not control its borders, could not direct investment to infant enterprises, could not alter regulations, could not change procurement rules to favour British business, and in all these and thousands of other areas would have to accept foreign jurisdiction.
Sky News
21-05-2025
- Business
- Sky News
Politics latest: Starmer confirms U-turn on winter fuel payments - but Number 10 will not say when
U-turn on winter fuel sees widespread calls for other policies to be reversed More reaction is coming in to the prime minister hinting that the government will U-turn on its policy over winter fuel payments. These were restricted last year by the government to those receiving benefits, whereas they were available to all pensioners. At PMQs today, Starmer suggested this policy will be reversed, saying the government wants to ensure "more pensioners are eligible for winter fuel payments" going forward. Responding to the news, the Green Party has called for the government to go further. Sian Berry said the change of policy "shows just how much pressure [Starmer] is now under, from the public, Greens and others in opposition, and many Labour MPs". She said the chancellor must "try harder" and tax the "extremely wealthy" to restore payments to "the millions of pensioners Labour has betrayed". Berry called on Rachel Reeves to also "reconsider other cruel political choices", such as the government's welfare reforms and refusal to axe the two-child benefit cap. She said: "Together, these U-turns would save hundreds of thousands from being pushed into poverty." Lessons to be learnt - and should they apply to other policies? But the Greens aren't the only ones with other policies in mind that they would like to see reversed. Labour MP John McDonnell said "we can all recognise a U-turn when we see one". "Questions have to be asked on how we got into this mess and if the lesson has also been learnt about the cuts to disability benefits", he added. Meanwhile, Plaid Cymru have also drawn parallels between the cuts to winter fuel payments and potential cuts to disability benefits. Ann Davies, the party's work and pensions spokesperson, said the government's change of course offers "little comfort to around 600,000 Welsh pensioners affected by the cut last winter". She added that the decision sends a "clear and callous message: that the UK government does not care about older people". Davies continued: "At the same time, slashing £6 billion from disability benefits exposes the continued poor priorities of a government more focused on balancing spreadsheets than protecting lives. "A government that removes heating support from pensioners and strips essential benefits from disabled people is not making 'tough choices' – it's making cruel ones. If Labour truly wants to rebuild trust, it must reverse these decisions and abandon the austerity agenda." Trust in the government is broken In Scotland, the agenda is similar. The SNP have called for a "full and immediate U-turn on winter fuel payments". Stephen Flynn added that the government must also "abandon its plans to impose even more austerity cuts to disabled people and public services at the spending review." "Keir Starmer is scraping around in desperation to recover the ground he has lost, but the damage is already done. "Trust in his government is broken," Flynn added.
