Latest news with #NewLabour
The Sun
19 hours ago
- Business
- The Sun
Trump humiliated Starmer with ‘politics for dummies' lesson – Donald understands voters in way Labour never will
AS humiliations go, it was a humdinger served with deadly disdain on home soil but with a global audience. And judging by the gritted teeth expression that suggested he'd been fashioned from clay by Wallace and Gromit creators Aardman Animation, our Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer knew it. It came from US President Donald Trump and it involved the F-word — Farage. 'Politics is pretty simple,' he shrugged, as he offered unsolicited advice on how Sir Keir should handle 'the thing going on between you and Nigel' as though they were a married couple going through a rough patch. He added: 'Generally speaking, the one who cuts taxes the most, the one who gives you the lowest energy prices, the best kind of energy, the one that keeps you out of wars . . . a few basics . . . And in your case, a big immigration component.' And there you have it, in a nutshell. Politics for dummies, yet still the incumbent Labour government just don't seem to get it. Unlike Tony Blair and 'New Labour,' who understood that attracting and maintaining wealth promoted the growth that any country needs to thrive economically, 'Same Old Labour' seems intent on strangling it. Consequently, its policies are causing a mass exodus of the wealthy, who are taking with them their assets, taxes, and the jobs they generate. Meanwhile, thousands in need of financial assistance are arriving on small boats, nurses/doctors are demanding more pay and state-funded civil service jobs are now at a 19-year high of 550,000. You don't have to be a financial expert to know that it's economically unsustainable. Meanwhile, a Sun report revealed that nearly 50,000 businesses in the UK are on the brink of collapse as costs put them under 'significant' financial stress — with Chancellor Rachel Reeves's recent increase in National Insurance payments being one of the key reasons. The 'critical' financial level among bars and restaurants alone is up by 41 per cent. As f ormer Reform MP Rupert Lowe posted earlier this week, there is so much bureaucracy and high cost involved in starting up a small business in the UK, 'Why bother?' Indeed. It also might explain why the UK's 'dark economy' is flourishing, with nearly 1,000 businesses fined a total of £37million for employing illegal workers last year. Awkward moment Trump blasts 'nasty' Sadiq Khan for 'terrible job'… before Starmer interrupts: 'He's a friend of mine!' It's unclear whether all the businesses — including, natch, car washes, barbers and salons — have paid the fines, but it shows that Immigration Enforcement teams are working hard to tackle the issue. Perhaps if they put the same zeal into preventing those working illegally from entering the country in the first place, the problem would largely disappear overnight. But, yet again, Labour is showing the same paralysis that blighted the Tories for so many years when it comes to implementing blindingly obvious solutions that would have the backing of the majority of the electorate. So little wonder that elections expert Sir John Curtice recently declared that Starmer has had the 'worst start' for any newly elected Labour or Conservative Prime Minister. 5 He says that voters 'still don't know what [Starmer] stands for' and right now it's looking like Sir Keir himself doesn't know what he stands for. Trump is a wrong'un in so many ways, but he understands the basic principle that if you let people work, impose fair taxes, tackle crime and keep state interference in their lives to a minimum, they will take personal responsibility and thrive. Slick operator Farage understands that, too, and, unlike the Tories and Labour, his claims that he will fix the UK's problems remain untested. So, unless Starmer sticks Trump's vote-winning 'basics' on the fridge at Downing Street and acts on them, his tenure will be as short-lived as Wallace and Gromit's trip to the moon. MOLLY HAVING A BAWL THE Instagram account of hugely successful 'influencer' (8.5million followers on Instagram alone) Molly-Mae Hague shows a carefully curated collection of artfully shot photos depicting a seemingly perfect life. Beautifully blow-dried hair, designer outfits, luxury cars and holiday destinations, she's selling her fans their dream existence while funding her own via lucrative brand deals. Yet, in a couple of her recent live streams to fans, she's seen sobbing and riddled with anxiety after having her chain yanked by online haters. So perhaps those close to her might advise a spell away from social media altogether or, at the very least, the comments section. And at the same time, those being outright nasty (rather than expressing any valid criticism in a measured way) to someone whose clearly struggling with their mental health should give her a break too. It might just improve their lives as well. As Nelson Mandela once said: 'Resentment is like drinking poison and then hoping it will kill your enemies.' Sexy Syd's a jeanius seller AN ad for American Eagle jeans featuring Hollywood actress Sydney Sweeney has sparked an online backlash. Why? Because the ad says 'Sydney Sweeney has great genes jeans.' Which, according to some, smacks of 'eugenics', 'Nazi propaganda' and promotes 'white supremacy'. Sigh. Is there literally anything now that someone, somewhere can't take offence at if they try hard enough? It's an eye-catching ad to sell jeans, featuring a gorgeous young woman with, yes, great genes. And that would apply equally if it was Naomi Campbell. A CASE STUDY IN FEES A VIRAL video shows a sobbing woman slumped to her knees at Sofia Airport in Bulgaria after a Ryanair flight left without her. Apparently, staff said her bag was too big to take on board, she rammed it in the measuring thing to prove it wasn't, they said no anyway, and she presumably refused on principle to pay the extra to put it in the hold. Who knows? But considering Ryanair boss Michael O'Leary said last week he's considering raising the current bonus staff receive for identifying passengers with 'oversized bags', it might explain why they're so intransigent when a suitcase wheel or strap is one millimetre above the measuring line. You need an 'ology in airline suitcase sizing to travel stress-free these days. Meanwhile, me and my 55 x 45 x 25 hand luggage are currently stuck in Marseille, France, after a fire in the vicinity of the airport caused multiple cancellations, my BA flight among them. I know, I know. Pray for me. No time to age 5 LOOKING sensational on the cover of Harper's Bazaar UK, diva songstress Mariah Carey has given her views on getting older. 'I don't allow it – it just doesn't happen.' Er, right. Best scrap the £50billion a year anti-ageing industry then. She adds: 'I don't know numbers. I do not acknowledge time.' Which might explain why she's notoriously late for pretty much everything. JENNIFER ANISTON is reportedly dating an American life coach and hypnotist called Jim Curtis. She has liked some of his posts and, rumour has it, indulged in a spot of hypnosis herself after reading his book called Shift: Quantum Manifestation Guide: A Workbook For Coding A New Consciousness. Cripes. The title alone is enough to send you to sleep.
Daily Mail
6 days ago
- Politics
- Daily Mail
RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: The Epping migrant fiasco has revealed a troubling truth about our country. I have warned about this for years... now it can no longer be denied
Watching Essex Police escorting Far Left troublemakers to a confrontation with local residents protesting against a hotel in Epping being converted into an asylum hostel for single men should surprise nobody. These days it's par for the course. More than 20 years ago I dubbed the police 'the paramilitary wing of New Labour'.
Belfast Telegraph
6 days ago
- Entertainment
- Belfast Telegraph
D:Ream's Peter Cunnah on fame, war and finding his birth parents
He's talking to the Belfast Telegraph via Zoom from London about the group's newest album, Do It Anyway, which he made with long-time bandmate Al Makenzie. It's his biggest regret, he explains, that D:Ream's famous hit — Things Can Only Get Better — an anthem of hope and optimism, was used in New Labour's landmark 1997 election campaign which saw Tony Blair enter Number 10.
New Statesman
7 days ago
- Politics
- New Statesman
All roads lead to Rome? We should be so lucky
Illustration by Charlotte Trounce Last week I swapped the soundscape of urban London summer – the clicking gears of stolen Lime Bikes – for an equally monotonous sound: the cicadas general to a Tuscan evening, not to mention the high-pitched whirr of a mosquito about to commit a bloodthirsty strike on your ankles. And in my case, face. This is what Virgil's Eclogues were all about. For one month a year, Britain offloads most of New Labour to Chianti's rolling hills. Tony Blair used to spend August in those spruced-up rubble-stone farm houses. And the turkey twizzler Duce, Jamie Oliver, is such a fan of one local butcher in the hilltop town of Panzano he glibly refers to it as his 'second home'. So popular is the region with the other sort of leftish tribunes that in the early Noughties it received a new moniker: Chiantishire. Thank God for the perfectly calibrated social consciences of the invading Brits, otherwise the Italians might have a problem with this. The establishment anxiety – that Britain is slowly coming to resemble the Old Boot – is acute, no matter their affinity for the place. Plagued by low growth, regional inequality, general instability, populist gadflies and at the mercy of the bond markets? 'Welcome to Britaly' the Economist warned in 2022. I was sitting on a government owned-and-operated train from Rome to Florence, wondering if that would be so bad. The leather seats and postmodern interiors displayed a level of taste the good people at TfL do not possess. I assumed the waspy Italian businessman beside me was the CEO of Al Italia, or something. Thinking of the many hours I've spent delayed on a Great Western train in England, 'Welcome to Britaly' started to sound more like an aspiration than an omen. The illusion was soon broken. I arrived at the elegant squalor of Florence's train station, Santa Maria Novella, to discover that there was a citywide taxi strike. Though you would be forgiven for not noticing at all – there were no placards, no crowds, and seemingly scant industrial motive (if there was one beyond ambient dissatisfaction it certainly went unexpressed). I only discovered it was happening when I walked up to a small group of men smoking – the taxi drivers – and asked if one of them could drive me to the countryside. 'No, strike,' he said, gesturing limply to a bus station. The spectacle was so unspectacular I wondered if this is what the Tour de France would look like if it were organised by the bikes. Or what an Italian taxi strike would look like, if it were organised by Italian taxi drivers. Up the workers, etc. But it left me in a pickle: rural Tuscan bus services are not as good as the trains. So I did what any accomplished 29-year-old would do in this situation and called my brother. He collected me – after I dashed across Florence to the gates of the city – and in the car we reflected on how reassured the hand-wringy British establishment might be with this unfortunate turn of events. Put to shame by the trains, yes. But here is rhetorical justification for the superiority complex: sure, we have ceded our sovereignty to the long arm of the bond markets, and yes political instability typified the latter half of the 2010s with tremendous force. But those Euros, so lazy! The ponderous and haughty northern Europeans might be concerned they are turning into their southern European cousins. But they haven't nailed the key details of the transition, which is this: they are halfway there politically, but culturally they never will be. Michelangelo was just more important than whatever Albrecht Dürer came up with. The Protestant probity of Britannia is anathema to the south's winking Catholic loucheness. And tomatoes, we all know, are better consumed on the ultramontane side of things. And so, on a train back to Rome (wait, is that also the CEO of Al Italia?) I am unable to take their concern very seriously. The land that produced the Trevi fountain will never resemble one that boasts the blandly demure Eros in Piccadilly Circus. And what of the stolid Land Rover vs the unembarrassed Ferrari? Ale vs Sangiovese? Welcome to Britaly? We would never be so lucky [See also: Kemi Badenoch isn't working] Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Related
New Statesman
23-07-2025
- Politics
- New Statesman
The MoD's Afghan data breach shows us who we really are
Hundreds of people are evacuated out of Afghanistan by British armed forces in August 2021. Photo by Ben Shread/MoD Crown Copyright via Getty Images The Afghan data breach was not an isolated incident. Between 2023 and 2024, there were 569 known cases in which the Ministry of Defence (MoD) failed to keep sensitive information safe: software compromised, devices missing, documents mishandled. On 16 July it was revealed that a UK official had accidentally leaked information on 18,714 Afghan nationals applying for a government relocation scheme for those who had helped the British military. Before that, the MoD had made public the identities of 265 Afghan collaborators, most of whom were interpreters, in a stray email in 2021. It had left its payroll system vulnerable to hackers who gained access to the names and bank details of British military personnel. And it had admitted to losing hundreds of government assets, from laptops and memory sticks to a Glock pistol and a First World War machine gun. What explains this pattern of failings? It appears that by removing security checks, foregoing proper data protection, cutting back on staff and hiring outside contractors, the MoD laid the foundations for the unfolding national scandal. The leaks thus reflect the deeper maladies of the British state: a decrepit structure, starved of skills and resources, which is willing to meddle in the affairs of foreign countries yet incapable of running its own IT. It is equally the latest reverberation from the new century's version of imperialism, when Tony Blair hymned overseas conquest like Kipling reborn, and the British army marched through deserts it had last seen in 1880. The New Labour era was a period of peculiar political and geopolitical arrogance. Today, Keir Starmer praises the record of these governments and cites it as a model for his own, even as their legacies threaten to undermine his leadership and give succour to his right-wing opponents. Nostalgists for the Blair-Brown era tend to bracket its foreign policy, presenting the war on terror as a blunder that needn't detract from domestic achievements like Sure Start or the national minimum wage. But the Afghan debacle shows that these two spheres cannot be separated; the national and international dimensions of Blairism followed the same economic logic. As New Labour embarked on its state-building projects abroad, it simultaneously hollowed out the state at home, marketising those parts of it that hadn't yet been sold off by the Tories. The MoD was the second biggest departmental spender on private finance initiatives, raining hellfire down on Iraq and Afghanistan with the help of an emboldened private sector, to which it handed billions worth of contracts. This strategy left public institutions increasingly unable to function by themselves. They made little effort to develop their internal expertise, not least when it came to the new frontier of digital services and databases. Both New Labour's military adventurism and its private finance agenda emanated from a belief that the market-led 'liberal democracy' would conquer the world after the Cold War, replacing backward governments with modern ones, fusty bureaucrats with dynamic entrepreneurs. Authorities in Kabul and Westminster alike would be swept away by this emerging order. Since the arc of history supposedly bent in its direction, the transformation would be mostly spontaneous. Policymakers were encouraged to step back and let it take its course. Their main role was to remove the obstacles to this telos via targeted interventions: overthrowing unfriendly dictators, repealing onerous regulations and waiting for peace and prosperity to follow. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe But such progress never arrived. Instead, the Middle East was drenched in blood: cities bombed to oblivion, ancient heritage sites razed and ethnic conflicts inflamed, with a network of torture facilities springing up across the region to deal with popular resistance. The puppet government in Afghanistan hid out in its securitised Green Zone, siphoning off foreign aid while the rest of the country suffered an endless social crisis. Inequality widened, with basic services in short supply. Political opposition was monopolised by the Taliban, who could bide their time until the occupiers exhausted themselves. Nor was New Labour's 'modernising' vision realised on the home front, where opening the state to market competition brought no benefit to anyone apart from the successful competitors. Just as external actors took over what passed for public provision in Afghanistan, private entities assumed many of the traditional functions of government in Britain, creating a culture of kickbacks and corner-cutting, soaring costs and deteriorating services. Blair had assumed that he could remove the constraints on his 'Third Way' model – 'rogue regimes', nationalised utilities – and bask in its success. But in practice the elimination of those fetters led to perpetual crisis, which the government was forced to step in and manage: staying in the Middle East far longer than expected to attend to the aftermath of its invasions, while struggling to limit the blowback from its free-market reforms. This sequence of events unfolded not just in Britain but across the Global North, as governments joined foreign wars and delegated authority to big business. It soon gave rise to a paradoxical situation. New forms of international dependency were created, with impoverished client states becoming completely reliant on the imperial powers. At the same time, those powers themselves became dependent on predatory investors and asset-stripping corporations, with dire results for states and wider societies. So, as elites in Kabul looked to Western governments to stabilise their rule, they realised that the latter were grappling with their own set of instabilities, caused by the forward march of neoliberalism. Politicians in the developed world had forfeited their own sovereignty while trying to assert it over others. This dynamic contributed to the failure of the regime-change doctrine. These weakened states – internally atrophied and externally overstretched – were not up to the task of neocolonial governance. Their operations were often haphazard, their intelligence flawed. They never established hegemony, which requires the maintenance of power through a careful balance of coercion and consent. The mode of rule was based on the first far more than the second: domination pure and simple. Under this system, the original sins of colonialism began to proliferate. According to a BBC investigation, scores of Afghan civilians were executed by British special forces, with one SAS squadron reportedly competing internally to attain the highest body count. One veteran described it as 'routine' for soldiers to handcuff and kill detainees – including children – and then cover up their crimes by removing the restraints and planting weapons on the corpses. Killing, said another former fighter, was 'addictive'. 'On some operations, the troops would go into guesthouse-type buildings and kill everyone there… They'd go in and shoot everyone sleeping there, on entry.' Countries that are run in this way tend to rebel against their rulers. The abrupt Nato withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, allowing the Taliban to regain control rapidly, was an open acknowledgement of that fact. Two decades of engagement had cost an estimated 243,000 lives without leaving behind any durable power structure. While some clung to the dream of an indefinite occupation, most of the political and military establishment recognised the urgent need to jump ship. Yet the notion that Britain could easily escape this quagmire was no less misguided than the decision to enter it in the first place. Relations of dependency do not disappear overnight. UK officials had to work out what to do about the significant number of Afghans who lent their services to the war effort, and who now have a legitimate claim to asylum. Once again, their response was astoundingly inept: first presiding over a leak-prone MoD that broadcast the collaborators' details on an unencrypted spreadsheet; then failing to notice the mistake for 18 months; then refusing to inform those it endangered; and finally launching a belated resettlement scheme under the cover of a super-injunction. Britain has now abandoned even this fleeting attempt to make up for its reckless activities. The Defence Secretary, John Healey, has announced that no more Afghans whose data was exposed will automatically be offered relocation in the UK, nor will they be given compensation. He assures us there is 'little evidence of intent from the Taliban to conduct a campaign of retribution against former officials' – even though there is already a well-documented record of similar revenge attacks, and Healey admits he is 'unable to say for sure' whether people have been killed as a result of the breach. Naturally, the families of those featured on the spreadsheet are not as sanguine as he is about their possible fate. All this follows Labour's earlier decision to shut down safe routes for Afghan asylum seekers, abolishing both the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy and the Afghan Citizens Resettlement Scheme. These were designed for those who had assisted UK forces along with other vulnerable groups, but have now been closed with immediate effect, as part of a broader attempt to outflank the anti-migrant politics of Reform UK. Starmer's intention, it seems, is simply to ignore the inconvenient fallout of the war on terror. The fantasy of building a harmonious Western-orientated Afghanistan has been swapped for the fantasy of evading the consequences of that project. It will not turn out well. The Labour Party's wars of aggression have reshaped 21st-century Britain, not to mention the Middle East, in ways that are impossible to repress. In particular, by promoting the narrative that Muslims are incapable of running their own countries and attempting to modernise them at gunpoint, they have legitimated the kind of Islamophobia Nigel Farage is now wielding against the main Westminster parties: calling for a hard-border regime to keep out those lacking in 'British values'. Farage has used the data breach to further incite such paranoia, claiming with no evidence that sex offenders have been allowed into the UK under the resettlement programme. The only principled and effective antidote to this reactionary tendency is a full rupture with the legacy of New Labour. The first step would be to reckon with the scale of suffering caused by foreign interventions and accept Britain's obligation to alleviate it to the greatest possible extent: by welcoming refugees, easing sanctions that continue to strangle the Afghan economy, and paying reparations. The real test of whether we've learnt from the 2000s, however, is whether we continue to repeat its mistakes. The current Labour government might be more wary of dispatching troops to faraway places. But it still sent RAF spy planes to aid Israeli intelligence operations in Gaza, and has supplied components for Israel's F-35 jets that are being used in air strikes, all in the service of a protracted regime-change campaign against Hamas. It refuses to rule out supporting a US-Israeli assault on Iran, which would inevitably cause mass death and displacement as well as creating many more refugees. If the government's main foreign policy ambition is to act as Washington's henchman, this is in part because its domestic policy is not designed to reclaim the sovereignty that was relinquished during the neoliberal period; it is characterised by the same mix of deregulation and deference to private interests. In this sense, the data leak offers a glimpse of a much wider problem: the ability of Blairism to survive amid the wreckage it has made. [See also: Israel and Gaza: A question of intent] Related
