Latest news with #LiberalDemocrats'
New European
27-05-2025
- Business
- New European
If universities sink, then so will Starmer
Universities, left to find new ways to pay the bills, aggressively recruited foreign students, who pay much higher fees – meaning most universities now rely on overseas students to stay afloat, a business model created with the full knowledge of successive governments. The UK's universities have had a tough few decades, in both political and financial terms. The Conservative-led coalition transformed their funding model by tripling tuition fees, destroying the Liberal Democrats' credibility for a generation in the process. But the toxicity of that decision, combined with the choice not to have tuition fees increase with inflation, meant the government went nowhere near increasing fees for more than a decade, while education was not immune to austerity cuts and belt-tightening across government. Despite that, unis have been relentlessly attacked by MPs and ministers for that model, with some suggesting foreign students are 'taking places' that would otherwise be filled by Brits (in practice they are subsidising places for UK students), or else that they are serving as a gateway for unwanted immigrants to enter the country, contributing to that 'crisis'. Fold in universities' place at the centre of the culture wars – as if either left wing academics or student activism were anything new – and by the time Labour re-entered government last year, British universities were exhausted, demoralised, and several were on the verge of financial collapse. No one thought Labour would enter government and scrap tuition fees while lavishly funding universities, but academics and university bosses alike hoped for some improvement – at least an end to universities being endlessly dragged into the culture wars, caught in the middle of battles between the Home Office and Treasury on immigration, or told to find 'efficiency savings' as if it's a new idea, rather than something that has been demanded of them every year for a decade. Needless to say, they have been disappointed. Skills minister Jacqui Smith ruffled feathers in the sector when she accused universities, in the pages of the Telegraph, of having 'lost sight' of their responsibility to spend public money wisely, launching into attacks on vice chancellors' salaries and demanding they cut 'wasteful spending'. But Blue Labour MPs have gone much further. Dan Carden, who was head boy at one of the North West's most prestigious grammar schools, St Edward's College, before studying at the LSE, said in the Daily Mail that he 'would close half our universities and turn them into vocational colleges' because 'we need to renew the skills required for production, not produce an endless stream of graduates for email jobs and human resources'. Carden's Blue Labour colleague Jonathan Hinder – who also attended one of the North West's most prestigious grammar schools, before going on to study history and politics at Oxford – expressed similar sentiments, saying 'I don't think we should have anywhere near as many universities and university places'. He added he would be 'not that disappointed' if several universities collapsed as overseas student numbers fell. To say such comments are testing the patience of academics would be the understatement of the century. Backbenchers could be easily ignored were it not for the fact that No 10 seems highly attuned to the concerns of Blue Labour, hyper-focused on Reform, and blind to what they see as a simple fact – that if universities started failing, Labour's prospects of re-election would collapse with them. 'None of that sentiment would survive contact with the reality of even one university going bankrupt,' says Professor Rob Ford of the University of Manchester. 'Because the fallout from that in the place where it happened would be catastrophic, and the MPs that represent that place would experience it like a meteorite hitting in terms of the local economy.' The impacts would be direct and indirect, he explains. 'Universities don't just employ lecturers, they employ thousands of people at all sorts of levels. They have huge estates, lots of buildings. People have to maintain those buildings. They have lots of administrative staff. Even at a modestly sized university, you are talking about thousands of people, at every rung of the career ladder.' Beyond that, though, universities support thousands more jobs in their local areas – some through contractors, such as caterers or student housing, but many more in the wider local economy. The nightlife in university towns, many of the private rentals, town centre shops, cafes and more rely on students. The majority of UK students still study away from home, and so are bringing money into an area. An overseas student is essentially bringing money into the country with every penny they spend – it is not just their fees, but their rent, food, and everything else that is essentially a UK export. This is backed up by data: research for Public First has found universities are among the top three exporters in more than 100 constituencies – something which isn't true for any other sector of the economy. Of those 100 seats, Labour holds 85. One of the study's authors put it starkly: 'In a lot of towns, your university is your car plant, it is your steel mill'. University WhatsApp groups swirl with rumours about which institutions are on the brink, and which university might fail first. Some look to what happened with local councils, where for years there were warnings councils would go bankrupt that never quite materialised – as no one wanted to be first. But at least nine councils have declared bankruptcy since 2020, and dozens more are at risk. If universities start to fail, it will be disastrous for Labour MPs and their constituents. It would be the modern equivalent of the factory closure, or the end of the pit. And despite how some Labour MPs seem to imagine their voters, it would be Labour's core supporters who were most affected. Some Labour MPs still seem to imagine the party's voters are the kind of mass manual working class that largely hasn't existed in this country for decades. The data is very different. A large-scale post-election survey by YouGov found that Labour won university graduates by more than two to one, securing 42% of them versus the Tories' 18%. But even in an election where the Conservatives resoundingly lost, among people with GCSE education or lower, Labour lost out to the Tories by 28% versus 31% (Reform got 23% of these voters). Blue Labour isn't trying to appeal to Labour's actual voting base – it is arguing that the party should give up on these voters in a bid to secure a new core. This was not seen as a credible argument when the hard left made it, and should not be seen as one now. That the tactic to appeal to this imagined new voting base relies on degrading a sector vital to the UK's economic fortunes, and to the future of the towns many Labour MPs represent, is gross recklessness. Universities have certainly made mistakes – so many years of education being seen as such a good thing means they have got out of the habit of making the economic case for their existence, some vice chancellor salaries are obviously ridiculous, and the sector has cried wolf too many times. But the numbers on the account books are clear: this time the crisis is real. Some senior university leaders still think the government has more sense than to allow a university to collapse – probably. Professor Sally Wheeler is the vice chancellor of Birkbeck, University of London, an institution founded to provide part-time evening education for the working classes. She thinks if it came to the crunch, the government would step in – at least for some. 'I question: would Labour let a uni go bust? Well, they might within the M25 – that's what everybody says, where there are an awful lot of them. Would they in a red wall seat? I doubt it,' she says. She doesn't expect transformational new money from Labour – people in her job are having to be ever more creative to keep the lights on, she says, from making commercial partnerships to looking at campuses overseas. But she expresses frustration that a lack of insight creates problems no minister would likely ever intend. These range from the mundane, such as small universities like hers facing as much compliance cost as those five or 10 times larger, to the ridiculous. She highlights an issue with hybrid teaching, in which some students learn in person and some dial in remotely. The tech is there, the students love it, and for an institution like Birkbeck designed to help people with other commitments to study, it's ideal – but overseas students aren't allowed to use the tech. They can't even install it. This is because of restrictions to crack down on dubious visas. The sector is beset by issues like this, she explains. Ultimately, universities don't expect miracles from Labour. After a dubious first year in government, they don't expect much. On a pragmatic level, senior figures hope that ministers will engage with the practical issues that could be fixed with little cost, which might make a hard job slightly easier. But the big hope is a philosophical one – that Labour won't get so preoccupied in a battle with Reform over the souls of a largely imagined working class that it ignores, or even cheers on, a potential economic calamity in its new political heartlands. Higher education might have been bad at making the arguments, but its campuses are the new factories, or even the new mines, supporting thousands or tens of thousands of jobs. Closures could devastate communities for a generation. Surely, they hope, Keir Starmer won't let himself be sleepwalked into being the 21st-century Thatcher?
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The White House really does want Fox News to fire its pollster
It was about a week ago when Fox News released the results of its latest national poll, which, like most recent surveys, included all kinds of discouraging news for Donald Trump and his agenda. The president, predictably, was not pleased. But instead of simply whining about his unpopularity, Trump went further, suggesting that Fox News should 'get rid of' its pollster. Earlier this week, the president published even more hysterical items to his social media platform, claiming that major news organizations 'CHEAT' with their public opinion research. The Republican proceeded to refer to pollsters as 'Negative Criminals' (I still don't know what that means), adding, 'These people should be investigated for ELECTION FRAUD, and add in the FoxNews Pollster while you're at it.' The next day, the White House's Stephen Miller appeared on the network, and Fox News' John Roberts reminded his guest about some of the results from his employer's latest poll. The presidential adviser didn't hesitate. 'I don't want to make things awkward for you, John, but it is our opinion that Fox News needs to fire its pollster,' Miller said. He added that, as far as the White House is concerned, Fox News' pollster 'has always been wrong' about Trump. Right off the bat, it's worth emphasizing the fact that Fox News polls — the network's partisan reputation notwithstanding — have been rather accurate of late. But I'm also struck by the fact that Trump and his team have complained bitterly about all kinds of media outlets and their polls, but Fox News is the only one that's been targeted by the president's and the White House's public declarations that the pollster should be fired. It's a push rooted in an unspoken insult. In the run-up to Election Day 2024, Trump argued that Fox News 'shouldn't be allowed' to show remarks from his Democratic rival. Around the same time, the Republican also argued that Fox News 'shouldn't allow' Democratic attack ads. Trump added soon after that Fox News should stop 'constantly putting on Liberal Democrats' who end up 'nullifying' Republican guests. We heard related talk during his first term. Around this time six years ago, the president whined online that Fox News was going too far 'in covering the Dems,' referring to Democratic presidential candidates. Trump added that Fox News executives should instead prioritize 'the people who got them there.' A Washington Post analysis added that it was a remarkable sentiment because it was 'an explicit expression of his expectation that Fox News will at least play down coverage of Democratic issues and candidates, if not shut them out entirely.' As we discussed at the time, Trump was making clear that he saw Fox News not as a news organization, but as a Republican entity that exists to advance a partisan cause. Indeed, the same week, the then-president insisted that if the network was 'putting more Democrats on than you have Republicans,' then Fox News was necessarily straying from what Trump saw as its proper mission. The Post's 2019 analysis added that Trump saw a 'symbiosis' between the network and his political operation and that the president also expected 'Fox News to box out anti-Trump voices in the name of staying true to a group he views as their shared base.' The more the White House calls on Fox News to fire its pollster, the more we're reminded that Trump continues to see the network as a political instrument instead of a news organization. This article was originally published on
The Guardian
23-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Russia imposes sanctions on 15 MPs and six members of the House of Lords
Russia imposes sanctions on 15 MPs and six members of the House of Lords, banning them from the country over what it called 'hostile statements and unfounded accusations' about Moscow. The Russian foreign affairs ministry published a statement on Wednesday accusing the UK of 'fabricating anti-Russian narratives' and attempting to 'demonise' the country. The ministry announced sanctions against 21 British politicians from across the political spectrum, targeting parliamentarians who have called for frozen Russian assets to be seized and used to fund Ukraine's war effort. Those sanctioned include Labour MPs Phil Brickell, Jeevun Sandher, Johanna Baxter and Blair McDougall, and the Liberal Democrats' Alistair Carmichael, Chris Coghlan, Helen Maguire and James MacCleary. Stephen Gethins of the Scottish National party and Jim Shannon of the Democratic Unionist party were also on the list. McDougall, who is a member of the foreign affairs select committee, said that 'being targeted by this thuggish, criminal regime is a compliment. That among the reasons is that I have been rude to Putin shows how brittle and pathetic his regime is. This won't stop British MPs from speaking up for the people of Ukraine.' Brickell, another member of the committee, said: 'I've been to Ukraine – I've seen the death and destruction Putin has wrought there over the last three years. So if he thinks that sanctioning myself and colleagues will get us to shut up he has another thing coming. Putin and his cronies must pay for the crimes they have committed. Slava Ukraini.' Sandher, a member of the Treasury committee, said: 'Almost a century ago, British politicians made the mistake of letting dictators like Putin redraw Europe's borders by force. That led to the most destructive war in humanity's history. We should be doing everything we can to stop that happening again. If that means me being sanctioned by Russia, so be it.' Maguire, who is her party's defence spokesperson, posted on X that she and other Liberal Democrat MPs would 'wear this retaliatory sanction as a badge of honour'. All four MPs quoted have in recent months called for the UK to work with allies to seize frozen Russian central bank assets and use them to support Ukraine. The UK government has long advocated for frozen Russian assets to be seized, but its position became more pronounced this year after an endorsement by David Lammy, the foreign secretary. 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 Other European governments such as France and Germany and institutions such as the European Central Bank are reticent over fears that such a move would breach the principle of the immunity of sovereign assets, deterring investment from countries such as China and Saudi Arabia. The peers sanctioned by Moscow included David Alton, a cross-bencher who chairs the joint committee on human rights, Kevan Jones, a former Labour MP who was a member of the intelligence and security committee when it published its Russia report, and Ross Kempsell, the Conservative peer who is a former special adviser to Boris Johnson. Of the 15 MPs sanctioned, 13 were from the 2024 parliamentary intake. In 2022, Russia sanctioned 287 MPs after the UK took action against Russian politicians over the invasion of Ukraine.
Spectator
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Spectator
How the Liberal Democrats conquered Middle England
The Liberal Democrats' foreign affairs spokesperson Calum Miller, elected as the new MP for Bicester and Woodstock last year, joins James Heale to talk about the ambitions of the party that became the largest third party in Parliament in 100 years at the 2024 general election. They want to overtake the Conservatives to be the second party in local government – could they one day overtake the Tories to become the official opposition? A former civil servant, Oxford University policy manager and councillor, Calum joins Coffee House Shots to talk about why he got into politics, how Brexit radicalised his desire for good governance and why, for all the fun, there is a serious point behind Ed Davey's stunts. Produced by Patrick Gibbons.
Telegraph
08-04-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Reeves rejects ‘Buy British' campaign as a response to US tariffs
Rachel Reeves has rejected requests to launch a 'Buy British' campaign in response to Donald Trump's trade war. The Chancellor dismissed 'inward-looking' calls from MPs for a publicity drive that would urge shoppers to buy more goods and produce grown in the UK. It comes as Downing Street looks to change procurement rules to give an advantage to British firms bidding for government contracts. Answering questions in the Commons on Tuesday, Ms Reeves was asked by Daisy Cooper, the Liberal Democrats' Treasury spokesman, to 'commit to a 'Buy British' campaign'. She replied: 'In terms of buying British, I think everyone will make their own decisions. 'What we don't want to see is a trade war with Britain becoming inward-looking, because if every country in the world decided they only wanted to buy things produced in their country, that is not a good way forward. 'Our country has benefited hugely from access to global markets and we want to continue to be able to do that because that is in our national interest, for working people and businesses in our country.' Her remarks were later echoed by the Prime Minister's official spokesman, who said Sir Keir Starmer believes it should be up to individual shoppers which products they choose to buy. Asked if Sir Keir agreed with his Chancellor, the spokesman said: 'Well, of course, we're an open trading nation. That is something the Prime Minister and Chancellor have previously said. We want to see fewer trade barriers around the world. 'At the same time we also continue to prioritise and support British manufacturers, British producers… We can take a two-fold approach, we can be an open trading nation while also supporting British producers and manufacturers.' Challenged on why the Prime Minister would not launch an official campaign, the spokesman replied: 'It's up to people to decide what they want to buy. 'We're not going to tell people where they buy their stuff, but the Government is always going to back British producers and manufacturers.' A poll of 2,170 people by Savanta carried out over the weekend, from April 4-6, found almost six in 10 people (59 per cent) would support a campaign to buy more British-made goods. Exactly half of those surveyed said they were now less likely to buy US goods in the wake of the global tariffs announced by Mr Trump. Ms Cooper said the Government refusing to back a Buy British campaign was 'an insult to businesses being pushed to the brink'. 'This is completely out of touch with the British people who are rallying behind local businesses in their time of need,' she said. 'Buying British is a powerful way that people can get behind local businesses and show that as a country we won't give in to Donald Trump's bullying.' Downing Street's approach is a contrast to plans being drawn up that would see major public sector projects instructed to favour British companies bidding for contracts. This principle could apply to new transport infrastructure, offshore wind or defence investments that will be announced in this year's industrial strategy and spending review.
