Latest news with #Pensioners
The Guardian
21 hours ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves: archangel of hope fails miserably at making everyone feel better off
When Rachel Reeves took over the Treasury last year, she went out of her way to portray herself as the Ministering Angel of Death. Her stock answer to any question was that 'Everything is terrible'. The Tories had bankrupted the country. There was no money for anything. Pensioners were going to have to die to save the rest of the country. Everywhere she looked there was only a world of pain. And more pain was all she had to offer. But hers would be a Labour pain. A fiscally responsible Labour pain. A pain for which the country had voted in the last election. A pain which everyone would stoically bear in the national interest. The sunlit uplands would have to wait a while. Only less than a year on and it turns out that people aren't all that thrilled with being offered a diet of yet more pain. They have had enough of that under the Tories. They had voted for Labour because they hoped they would offer an alternative. A morally superior, fiscally responsible pain might sound good in theory, but people have had enough of everything being a bit shit. Even if they can logically understand it might take a while for Reeves to turn things round, they don't want to hear about it. They would rather be lied to that there are quick fixes available. Just text Nigel Farage and he will offer you any number of them. Rachel had promised us only one major financial event a year. After the budget and the spring statement we now had a third. The spending review: a budget without the tax rises. For this spending review the Ministering Angel of Death had tried to reincarnate herself as the Archangel of Hope. A beacon of light and joy who was here to tell us all that things were going to be great after all. More than that, they were great now. A lesson to all of us in cognitive dissonance. After a prime minister's questions in which Kemi Badenoch had reminded everyone that she really wasn't that good in the job by saying how much she hoped to improve, the Archangel of Hope got to her feet. She did her best to sound upbeat, but it didn't come naturally. Still, fake it to make it. Her purpose in life was to make everyone feel better off. And she had more or less done that. Tick for Rachel's life goal. If you didn't feel better, then the problem was with you. She had done her bit. This was a contract with the people and the people had to pull their weight. It was all going to be an uphill struggle. Yes, she knew that most of the money she was going to promise was for capital projects that wouldn't see the light of day for years, but she wanted everyone to look on the bright side. Day-to-day spending might be down and you might still be waiting too long for a life-saving operation but it was a good moment to go and look at a field and imagine how it would look with an affordable housing development on it in 15 years time. Labour MPs nodded along and cheered. They could do this. Keir Starmer looked slightly preoccupied. Maybe he knew something they didn't. Next, the Archangel of Hope switched her attention to the opposition parties. Here she was on much stronger ground. You might think that she wasn't entirely in command of all the numbers but just spare a moment to think of the alternatives. Then you will come running back to Labour. The Tories she dismissed in a sentence. Fourteen years and Liz Truss. She and the country no longer takes them seriously. The real opposition is Nigel Farage. Much of her speech was aimed at Reform. Nige had loved the Liz Truss budget and was now making even greater fantasy tax and spending commitments than she had. If you want to be broke, then Farage was your man. We then went into a 20-minute lacuna of suspended animation. Rachel might have been talking of her excitement of renewal – a time of plenty for housing, defence and health – but it didn't come across in her delivery. Rather the words died in her mouth. Rachel isn't a fluent communicator. There had been a month long buildup of leaks and speculation to this speech and now we were in danger of nodding off. Even so, it didn't really feel as if we were missing that much. Sure there was a promise to end the use of hotels for immigrants – something Labour should have done much earlier – and there were some large sums mentioned elsewhere, but the devil would be in the detail. The areas of public spending that the Archangel of Hope said she valued but which came with no money attached. Presumably these were just honourable mentions in despatches. Areas that were actually in line for real terms cuts. But today was not a day for bad news. This was a day when the money tree was turned on. Especially for Labour MPs in areas that are threatened by Reform. Of the 20 Trailblazing English towns in line for a £20m handout, 19 are Labour seats. Even better, Reeves had identified £14bn of efficiency savings. The UK was going to get its very own Doge. Only this time the money would be passed back to public spending elsewhere. These were Labour choices. The choices of the British people. Everything was for the best in the best of all possible worlds. It's becoming increasingly hard not to feel just a little bit sorry for Mel Stride. OK, we know he's out of his depth and he has the air of a Home Counties bank manager whose branch has been scheduled for closure, but it's a thankless task being shadow chancellor. He mumbled something about tax rises that may or may not come in the autumn, but mostly he was made to betray the fact that he had no clue what the Tories would do if they were in power. Not that anyone is about to make the mistake of handing them power any time soon. But the Melster smiled gamely. He is content with his own mediocrity. That just left the Archangel of Hope to wind things up. It was time for everyone to cheer up. The era of miserabilism was over. Labour had turned the corner. Everything was going to be great whether you liked it or not. Happy days were here again.
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
Rachel Reeves's economic vision is coming into focus – a year too late
A government this young should not look so old. Keir Starmer has not yet celebrated his first anniversary in Downing Street, but the government already moves with the plodding gait of a caretaker administration. There were painful stumbles at the start. The cut to winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners was announced within a month of the general election. Now, in the face of overwhelming opposition, it has been largely reversed. Meagre savings to the exchequer were procured at an exorbitant price in political capital. The early display of unsentimental cost-cutting by the chancellor was meant to show that Labour was serious about fiscal discipline. The legacy of Tory mismanagement – a £20bn revenue shortfall – could be cited in mitigation. Pensioners were never going to relish the confiscation of their entitlements, just as farmers were sure to complain about the loss of inheritance tax perks and businesses were unlikely to thank the chancellor for hiking their national insurance bills. But maybe some slack would be cut to an incoming government that dared to take tough decisions; maybe the memory of terrible Conservative rule was convertible into credit for their successors. The idea was to advertise Britain, under newly reliable management, as a beacon of orderliness in a chaotic world and a magnet for investment. Prudently rationed public resources would be deployed in ways that stimulate growth – upgrading transport and energy infrastructure; housebuilding. Prosperity would follow, buoying the national mood. This week's spending review is meant to be a pivotal moment in the execution of that plan. There will be increases in capital and day-to-day spending by £113bn and £190bn respectively; well in excess of what the Tories had proposed before the election. The very opposite of austerity, the Treasury insists. Rachel Reeves boasts of 'national renewal' paid as the dividend of fiscal and political stability. But Whitehall departments not chosen for munificence face harsh real-terms spending cuts. And the benefit of investment in new trains, homes and power stations won't be felt for years, decades in some cases. In a more benign climate, a newish government could make a virtue of policy designed for the long term, not bending every announcement for tactical gain. But that amounts to a plea for national forbearance, urging collective sacrifice in anticipation of future reward. After years of stagnant incomes and rising bills, there isn't much receptiveness among British voters for yet more deferral of gratification. Also, the time to get a reliable mandate for that kind of programme was before the election. The fatal flaw in Labour's economic strategy was overestimating how much goodwill would be available to the party once it had fulfilled its electoral utility as a tool for ousting the Tories. Keir Starmer won a huge majority by making himself inoffensive to as many people as possible. The campaign started from the premise that Labour loses whenever voters think it is planning a reckless tax-and-spending spree, or suspect that its leader is a leftwing fanatic. Those threats were neutralised with ferocious discipline, but at a cost in clarity about the post-election agenda. Starmer embodied a contradiction – change without upheaval. That was bound to unravel on first contact with the reality of government. In a bygone era, Reeves's attempt to deflect blame for painful choices on to the Tory legacy might have been more effective. There was obviously a mess to be cleared up and sometimes voters have long memories. The winter of discontent was brandished in evidence to disqualify Labour from office for more than a decade. Endemic sleaze and callous neglect of the public realm in the 90s did the same for the Conservatives. Their recent reign of disrepute should impose another long period of opposition penance. It probably will, but not necessarily to Labour's benefit. The conventional division of allegiance between two main parties is breaking down, perhaps irrevocably. Reform UK regularly leads in opinion polls. In terms of councils controlled, the Liberal Democrats are Great Britain's second-largest party. These might be transient trends. It isn't unprecedented for smaller parties to capitalise on dissatisfaction with the ruling when the main opposition is still discredited and divided after recent ejection from office. In late 1981, the SDP-Liberal Alliance polled at about 50%. In a general election, 18 months later, they won 23 seats. Reform is not the first party to be led by Nigel Farage and his previous vehicles – Ukip; the Brexit party – didn't convert their midterm menace into parliamentary seats. But that was when the Conservatives were competitive. In 2019, Farage didn't even try to rival Boris Johnson, withdrawing more than 300 candidates to make a Tory majority more likely. There are reasons to think the current fragmentation in party support describes a more durable shift in the structure of British politics. Reform's ascent, mostly at the expense of the Tories, conforms to an international pattern of populists and nationalists challenging more established rightwing parties and, in the American case, swallowing the old guard whole. The moribund centre-right tradition of English conservatism doesn't look any closer to resuscitation than the twitching corpse of the pre-Trump Republican party. Powerful social and cultural trends are driving these changes. They express a depth of frustration and disillusionment that is resistant to appeals from candidates who come across as advocates for continuity of the existing system. This helps explain Labour's failure to sustain its status as the nation's preferred alternative to the Tories almost as soon as the election was over. The campaign foregrounded safety and reassurance, defining change primarily as a switch of personnel at the top. In the absence of a clear agenda for the future, Starmer and Reeves ended up owning everything that is desultory about the present. In an age of endemic mistrust in politics, there was precious little benefit of the doubt to be earned. Almost overnight, Labour became just another load of politicians, sounding the same, doing unpopular stuff and making excuses for why things aren't getting any better. That feels unfair to ministers who argue, with justification, that last autumn's budget and Wednesday's spending review set Britain on a path that is very different from anything the Tories had in mind. But precious months were wasted where the gap was too hard to discern, when the only visible agenda was painful tinkering with the status quo. The problem is not the trajectory now, but the shallowness of the angle where the lines diverged last July. It is the hesitancy of the steps, the stiff posture, that makes Labour look less like a fresh team with a purposeful stride, more like the familiar retread of a much longer incumbency. Rafael Behr is a Guardian columnist One year of Labour, with Pippa Crerar, Rafael Behr and more On 9 July, join Pippa Crerar, Rafael Behr, Frances O'Grady and Salma Shah as they look back at one year of the Labour government and plans for the next four years Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
The Sun
04-06-2025
- Business
- The Sun
PM swings on policies like windsock in a storm… damage from winter fuel fiasco means Labour's future already looks bleak
THE Labour government has been less than a year in office and yet its authority has already collapsed dramatically. A mood of desperation hangs over Downing Street as unpopularity mounts. 4 Bankrupt of credibility, convictions and cash, the Prime Minister swings around wildly like a windsock in a storm. Indeed, Sir Keir Starmer's continual changeability on policy is reminiscent of the great line from American comic legend Groucho Marx: 'Those are my principles and if you don't like them I have others.' Nothing captures Labour's erratic approach more graphically than the recent decision to reverse the withdrawal of the winter fuel allowance for most pensioners. The axing of this payment — worth £300 a year — was one of the first measures taken by the new Chancellor Rachel Reeves when she arrived at the Treasury last summer. Poor judgement Bristling with a stern sense of purpose, she declared that this step was vital to help fill the black hole in the public finances left by spendthrift Tories. But the facade of toughness was an illusion. The resolve of the Chancellor and Starmer's Cabinet did not last long. In the face of an angry campaign by pensioner groups, followed by a disastrous performance by Labour in last month's local elections, the Government signalled a headlong retreat, claiming that improved economic conditions now allowed greater flexibility, with the result that the allowance could be restored for all but the most wealthy older people. But if Sir Keir and his ministers think that they are going to get any credit from this U-turn they are badly mistaken. Starmer 'loses control' as over 1,000 migrants cross Channel in biggest daily total of 2025 – as French cops watch on On the contrary, the damage caused by this fiasco will be permanent. There will rightly be no acclaim for a government that showed such poor judgement and had so little determination to stick to its plan. The practical details remain vague but, wherever the new higher threshold for eligibility is set, there will still be pensioners who will lose out — a sure recipe for resentment and further controversy. There is also the disturbing factor that HMRC will be in charge of the new arrangements, something that hardly inspires confidence given its record of lost data, low productivity, unresponsiveness and arbitrary assessments. Perhaps even more important will be the long-term political fallout from this shambles, where ministerial incompetence has been matched by dishonesty. The great patriotic writer George Orwell once said that 'political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.' That is a perfect description of Labour's chaotic, deceitful mismanagement. 4 4 Ministers claimed that the withdrawal of the allowance would save £1.5billion a year, so what service are they going to cut or what tax are they going to increase to make up the shortfall? The public's contempt for the Government's shabby manoeuvres was highlighted by polling this week from Lord Ashcroft, the millionaire who runs a number of independent focus groups. Participants openly laughed at Starmer's exclamation that the threshold for the allowance could be moved because of the improvement in the economy. Understandably this group felt the Government was weak and easily buffeted by events. 'There's no thought and no strategic plan. It is like a tombola of ideas,' said one member. The lesson of modern British history is that when governments lose the trust of the public, they find it almost impossible to regain. That was true of Edward Heath in the 1970s and John Major in the 1990s, when he described the devaluation of the pound as 'fool's gold,' only to be forced into embracing just this policy on Black Wednesday in 1992. His landslide defeat in the 1997 General Election was inevitable from that moment. The future now looks bleak for Labour. Because the Prime Minister and his Chancellor are so infirm other ministers will be ready to challenge them on spending decisions. Black fiscal hole Endless turmoil now seems inevitable, fomented by faction fighting and ministerial ambition. Already the Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner, who sees herself as the keeper of Labour's socialist conscience, has emerged as a leader of the internal resistance to further cuts. The next big battleground will be to fight to end the two-child benefit caps, a sensible measure brought in by the coalition to discourage welfare dependency among parents who could not afford to raise large families. But in the sentimental struggle that has gripped Labour, this policy is widely seen as an engine of child poverty. Without strong leadership at the helm, the policy is likely to be ditched, creating yet another burden on the public purse. The winter fuel farce is an indicator that Labour is now likely to retreat into its traditional, left-wing comfort zone, characterised by more power to the unions, an expansion in state bureaucracy, and big pay awards for public employees. While spending spirals out of control and taxes have to rise, reform of the welfare system and the low productivity public sector will become impossible. The Labour Party is in a black fiscal hole of its own making. It had no real plan for office beyond wishful thinking. Now we are all paying the price for its folly.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Is Starmer Really Looking To Lift The Two-Child Benefit Cap? Here's What We Know
Keir Starmer might be on the cusp of lifting the two-child benefit cap, according to some reports. It comes after months of backlash towards the policy from both voters and Labour backbenchers. The prime minister has already U-turned on the government's controversial decision to axe winter fuel payments for 10 million pensioners last autumn, saying he wanted more people to be eligible for the lump sum last Wednesday. So here's what we know about might end up being Starmer's next 180... The policy, imposed by the Conservative government in 2017, restricts the amount of benefits a family can claim. It prevents most families from claiming means-testing benefits for any more than two of their children born after April 2017. As soon as Labour were elected last July, they confirmed they would be keeping the cap. Starmer even removed the whip from seven MPs who voted against the government and in favour of removing the policy. The cap has added to a growing headache for the government amid its wider crackdown on the welfare state. Two mothers even challenged the government in court over it in November. But Labour has kept it in place because of the country's economic woes – this policy alone is estimated to save the taxpayer around £3.5 billion per year – and the £22bn black hole the Tories supposedly left in the public finances. The Observer reported over the weekend that Starmer had privately backed abolishing the limit and requested the Treasury finds £3.5bn to do so. It comes after Reform UK leader Nigel Farage announced he would scrap the benefit cap and bring back the winter fuel payments as he looks to win over left-leaning voters. But deputy prime minister Angela Rayner refused to say if the cap would be scrapped when speaking to broadcasters on Sunday. She told Sky News: 'Lifting any measures that will alleviate poverty for some of the poorest families is not a bad idea.' But she told the BBC: 'I'm not going to speculate on what our government is going to do.' She pointed out that the government established the Child Poverty Taskforce, which is looking into whether to keep or abandon the cap. The taskforce was expected to publish Labour's child poverty strategy was in spring, but it has now been delayed to in autumn. The government has also suggested any such decisions would be made as part of a fiscal event – the next one being June 11′s spending review. Labour has fallen dramatically down the opinion polls in the last 10 months, while Reform UK storm ahead. YouGov found that the PM has fallen to his lowest net favorability rating last week, with just 23% of Britons having a positive view of Starmer. But polling guru Sir John Curtice told The Independent that lifting the cap – or reversing the changes to the winter fuel payments – would not be enough to fix Labour's fortunes in the polls. Pointing to Starmer's winter fuel U-turn, Curtice said: 'These things stick in the memory – so you can change the policy now and you can probably reduce the damage, but it's difficult to erase some people's memory.' Similarly, Tory peer and pollster Lord Hayward told the newspaper too many changes of heart could open the doors to future bids for reversals of policy while also undermining Starmer's authority. 'It is a display of insecurity which automatically gives rise to talk about the replacement of a leader,' he said. Liz Kendall Sparks Fresh Backlash As She Doubles Down On 'Cruel' Plan To Slash Disability Benefits 'This Is Austerity, Isn't It?': Justin Webb Roasts Minister Over Benefits Cuts Labour Slammed Over 'Simply Indefensible' £5 Billion Cuts To Disability Benefits
The Sun
17-05-2025
- Politics
- The Sun
Labour's great Brexit betrayal has begun – Sir Keir Starmer is selling Britain out in his EU surrender summit
LABOUR'S great Brexit Betrayal has begun. It's taken less than a year since they came to office, but on Monday they will bend their knees to their new masters from Brussels. 2 At a surrender summit taking place in London, Keir Starmer and his band of EU -obsessed cabinet ministers will formally place the United Kingdom on a pathway back under the control of the EU and they will betray the historic referendum result of 9 years ago. When Labour negotiates Britain loses and our hard-fought Brexit freedoms are about to be sacrificed and surrendered. Labour will try to dress this up as some form of reset, talk about protecting their co-called 'red lines' and deny backsliding on Brexit. But I know that Sun readers will not be fooled by Keir Starmer's spin and Labour's lies. After all, Keir Starmer has made a habit out of breaking promises – his pledges to freeze council tax and cut energy bills have been abandoned. His pledge not to tax working people was broken with new taxes on family businesses, farmers and the punishing jobs tax which will cost every working household £3,500. And we will never forget he pledged to protect pensioners energy but cruelly snatched away their winter fuel payments to fund pay rises for his trade union mates. 2 Keir Starmer and Labour cannot be trusted on anything and they certainly can't be relied on to stand up for our national interest and defend Brexit because they have never believed in it. From the moment the Referendum result was announced, Keir Starmer and the Labour Party set about undermining and sabotaging Brexit at every opportunity. They plotted and schemed because they arrogantly thought they knew better than you, the British public. That's why in Parliament Labour voted 48 times to block Brexit with Keir Starmer l eading campaigns for a second referendum, free movement and open borders, and keeping the UK tied to EU laws in a customs union. Now he is Prime Minister, Keir Starmer is hellbent on selling Britain out and giving up the Brexit freedoms we have benefited from. While Keir Starmer turns a blind eye to the benefits of Brexit, I know that Sun readers have welcomed them. Since we left the EU, we have been free to negotiate new trade deals with fast growing economies across the world and our freedom from EU bureaucracy meant we could roll out the Covid vaccine and end lockdowns quicker than our European neighbours across the Channel. We've also been able to secure a better deal for our fishermen and by ending free movement we have been able finally take back control of our borders from the EU. But despite these benefits, for months Labour have been negotiating in secret with the EU, putting everything on the table. Defence, migration cooperation, justice, fisheries and so-called youth mobility have all been up for grabs. While the UK already has a good trade deal with the EU and effective mechanisms to cooperate on defence and security, Labour are preparing to negotiate away the freedoms that we have and bind us closer into the EU. This will include Labour agreeing to make Britain a rule-taker once again under a process called dynamic alignment, subjecting British businesses to EU laws and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Keir Starmer is also looking to put Britain into the EU's carbon trading mechanism which will whack up energy bills and he could even give in to the EU's demands on fishing. Worryingly, Labour l ook set to open our borders and start the process of reintroducing free movement by the back door with some form of youth mobility scheme. Let's be clear, Labour's plans are not about improving cooperation with our European friends and allies, they are about surrendering control to them. Whenever Labour negotiates, Britain loses. And after Monday's surrender summit, Labour have pledged to continue to negotiate away our freedoms to Brussels with more summits set to follow. An official speaking on behalf of the Government has told representatives from businesses, charities and trade unions that: 'The Summit would also be the first of many, so even if something was not announced on 19 May, that did not mean that it would not be addressed on another occasion.' Piece-by-piece, law-by-law and summit-by-summit, Labour will betray Brexit. They've also been begging organisations to speak favourably about their EU surrender deal as they try to flood the media with positive comments to hide the fact that they are betraying Brexit and our national interest. While Labour surrenders our sovereignty and betrays Brexit, the Conservative Party will always stand up for Britain. It was a Conservative Government that trusted the British people in the Brexit Referendum and a Conservative Government that got Brexit done and took us out of the EU. That's why we have pledged to take back any powers Labour surrenders to the EU and why we will continue to fight on your behalf for strong border controls and to put Britain's interests first.
