Category: Politics

  • Starmer vows to ‘deepen’ UK-Canada ties alongside new PM Mark Carney

    Keir Starmer has vowed to “deepen” the relationship between the United Kingdom and Canada after it was confirmed that Mark Carney will be the country’s next prime minister. 

    The former governor of the Bank of England beat three rivals in the Liberal Party’s leadership contest in a landslide victory.

    Carney is expected to be sworn in as PM in the coming days and will lead the Liberals into the next general election, which is expected to be called in the coming weeks.

    In his victory speech, Carney attacked US president Donald Trump, who has imposed tariffs on Canada and said he wants to make the country the 51st US state. 

    “Americans should make no mistake”, he said. “In trade, as in hockey, Canada will win.”

    The UK prime minister has now responded to Carney’s victory, pledging to work with the incoming Canadian PM on “deepening the UK-Canada relationship together.”

    Starmer also wished outgoing Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau well “in his future endeavours.”

    The UK PM said in a statement posted to X: “Congratulations to Mark Carney on his appointment as Canada’s new prime minister.

    “I look forward to working closely with him on shared international priorities, including in the G7, and to further deepening the UK-Canada relationship together.

    “My best wishes to Justin Trudeau as he steps down from the role. I wish him well in his future endeavours.”

    The comments come as Starmer is urged to visit Canada this week to “stand together” with the Commonwealth nation against Trump’s threats. 

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Show solidarity with new Canadian PM amid Trump ‘bullying’, Starmer urged

    Source: Politics

  • A new Lowe? Reform UK’s civil war will be a protracted farce

    Nigel Farage and Rupert Lowe have been at loggerheads over political strategy for months. But the Reform row burst definitely into the public domain last week after Lowe voiced his grievances in an interview with the Daily Mail.

    Reform will fail if Farage maintains his “messiah” complex, Lowe suggested. He cast acid aspersions on the Reform leader’s management style, and warned that the party’s appearance as a “protest” vehicle is unserious.

    Farage’s comeback spoke to his genuine fury. “It’s difficult to have a frontbench with only five MPs, isn’t it? And he’s one of them”, he told the Telegraph in response to a specific criticism.

    Pressed on his colleague’s remarks about his delegating skills, he said: “Delegate? I’ve delegated everything.”

    He added: “If we had 30 MPs, we’d have a frontbench, but with five, we can’t.”

    Since their opening firefight, the feud between Lowe and Farage has escalated exponentially. A Reform statement on Friday announced that the party would be launching an independent investigation after it received “complaints from two female employees about serious bullying in the offices of the Member of Parliament for Great Yarmouth, Rupert Lowe”.

    The statement, co-signed by Reform chief whip Lee Anderson and party chair Zia Yusuf, continued: “In addition to these allegations of a disturbing pattern of behaviour, Mr Lowe has on at least two occasions made threats of physical violence against our party chairman.

    “Accordingly, this matter is with the police.”

    Lowe has vociferously denied any wrongdoing, going as far as to link the allegations to a “witch hunt” campaign to silence him and his criticisms. In one of his many posts to X/Twitter over the weekend, Lowe said he had received “a knife in my back over false allegations”.

    As I write on Monday, the plot is still very much thickening. But even as Farage and Lowe’s mutual antipathy develops, it is possible to form some immediate conclusions about how a protracted row will affect Reform, both in the short and long terms.

    Much of the commentary in recent days has linked Lowe to the long procession of right-of-Conservative pretenders who have come for Farage, and missed. Alan Sked, Michael Holmes, Richard North, Kilroy Silk, David Campbell Bannerman, Godfrey Bloom, Suzanne Evans, Patrick O’Flynn, Douglas Carswell, Steven Woolfe, Gerard Batten, Annunziata Rees-Mogg, Ben Habib and Howard Cox are some of the politicians to have taken on Farage in internecine scuffles over the past three decades. Their relative obscurity provides some indication as to just how well previous plots, coups and putches have gone for Farage’s critics.

    The dustbin of history is brimming with unrealised right-of-Tory “talent”. Of that Farage has made certain. I defer to an old UKIP truism: “Nigel always wins”.

    Of course, Farage’s historic issues with ego management mean there was something fundamentally foreseeable about this latest bust-up. And perhaps his record lends some credence to Lowe’s siren cries of conspiracy: the Reform leader does tend to fall out with party operators as soon as they near the verge of national prominence.

    But just because we’ve seen this movie before, does not imply Lowe vs Farage will end happily. Rather, Lowe’s substantial online presence will ensure every aspect of this row is played out in public. That means recurrent poor headlines for Reform — as an array of significant political milestones await.

    Unsurprisingly, new questions are being asked as to whether Reform can seize the ostensible opportunity presented to it by the local elections on 1 May. Then there is the matter of a potential by-election in Runcorn and Helsby. Reform’s campaign in Mike Amesbury’s seat, which was very much already underway, has suffered a serious setback.

    Lowe also boasts an intriguingly different profile to some of his Farage-sceptic forebears. He is the MP for Great Yarmouth and stands to maintain his Westminster presence for some time yet. Lowe’s criticism is legitimised and bolstered by his presence at the heart of SW1; he cannot be hidden away in some unexplored corner of the European Parliament. Lowe, moreover, is an extremely active parliamentarian — and an ambitious one too.

    In the age of the Online Right, which has accumulated as a noisy tendency on Elon Musk’s Twitter (X), Lowe has boundless potential for attention generation. Musk even appeared to endorse Lowe as a future Reform leader in January, after falling out with Farage. Since acquiring Musk’s support, Lowe has embraced some of the Online Right’s favourite talking points — including and especially on “mass deportations”.

    There is no wide audience for this mode of right-of-Conservative politics in Britain, but the political nature of Lowe’s criticism affords it greater potency and therefore longevity.

    All this said, the most important fact when considering Farage and Lowe’s beef is that the MP for Great Yarmouth is a political minnow — certainly when compared to his former boss.

    Farage is frequently cited as one of the most successful politicians of his generation, a fact reflected by his wide renown. Lowe’s most significant political achievement appears to be the volume of written parliamentary questions he has lumped onto ministerial desks since the general election. Indeed, Lowe might not have won his seat last July had Farage remained on the political sidelines. (His majority in Great Yarmouth is 1,426 votes).

    In this regard, the Farage-Lowe rivalry is plain to see and ideologically explicable. But in a political sense, there is no competition.

    And yet, criticism from the right will complicate Reform’s search for a coherent policy platform over the coming months — which is largely assumed to be the next step in the party’s “professionalisation” initiative. Some sort of deeper schism, whereby a party is established on Reform’s right, stands as another possibility. Whatever the findings of the independent investigation into Lowe, his relationship with Farage is already irredeemably bitter.

    Fringe criticism of Farage from the right is nothing new, of course; nor can you doubt the capacity of right-of-Tory egos to overestimate their political worth.

    It follows that Farage’s dilemmas, after weeks of floundering on geopolitical developments, have deepened.

    At present however, the most crushing aspect of this row for Reform is its optics. The party’s pitch this parliament has been that Farage is a prime minister-in-waiting. But if he cannot manage a diminutive bloc of five MPs, how can he govern a whole country?

    Expect Reform’s political opponents to hone variations of this question over the coming weeks.

    Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

    Lunchtime briefing

    Show solidarity with new Canadian PM amid Trump ‘bullying’, Starmer urged

    Lunchtime soundbite

    ‘Our Labour values are built on a simple but powerful idea: that every individual, regardless of background or circumstance, should have the support they need to make the most of their lives.’

    —  36 backbench Labour MPs have set up a new Get Britain Working Group to support government plans to cut billions from the welfare budget.

    They have released an open letter to Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary. One section of it reads as above.

    Now try this…

    ‘If voting today, Conservative members would – just – choose Jenrick as leader’
    From ConservativeHome.

    ‘Putin boots out more British diplomats in spying row’
    Via Politico.

    ‘In Reform UK’s power struggle, Farage takes on unusual role of moderate voice’
    Rupert Lowe row highlights split over direction of party, and threatens Farage’s ambition to be UK’s main rightwing force, the Guardian’s Eleni Coureareports

    On this day in 2023:

    Transport secretary told HS2 decision an ‘outrageous attempt to avoid scrutiny’

    Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

    Source: Politics

  • Starmer faces first by-election test as MP convicted of assault to stand down

    Mike Amesbury has said he will stand down as an MP at the “earliest [possible] opportunity” in a move that will trigger the first by-election of this parliament.

    The former Labour MP was last month given a 10-week prison sentence, suspended for two years, for punching a constituent in the street.

    Amesbury, who has been sitting as an independent MP in the House of Commons since he was suspended by Labour in October, has now revealed he is going to step down “as quickly as possible”.

    In his first interview since his sentencing, Amesbury told the BBC he “regrets” attacking constituent Paul Fellows “every moment, every day”.

    Asked about his future, he said: “I’m going to step aside at the earliest opportunity.

    “I’ve got processes I must go through — there’s a statutory process in terms of redundancies.”

    Amesbury insisted he would have fought to stay on as an MP had he been given a lighter community sentence, but said he believed he had been “punished accordingly” for the incident.

    MPs who receive a custodial sentence, even if it is suspended, automatically trigger a recall petition which could result in a by-election if 10 per cent of constituents sign it.

    Amesbury’s decision to quit means no recall petition will be triggered.

    ***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

    By-election time! First of the new Parliament, and an interesting one too…Labour have a 35 point majority in Amesbury's seat of Runcorn & Helsby (formerly Weaver Vale), which looks big, but these are volatile times, and ReformUK are in 2nd placewww.bbc.co.uk/news/article…

    — Rob Ford (@robfordmancs.bsky.social) 2025-03-10T17:44:21.441Z

    MPs cannot technically resign from the House of Commons, but they can be appointed to the defunct roles of either crown steward and bailiff of the Chiltern Hundreds or crown steward and bailiff of the Manor of Northstead by the Treasury.

    At the 2024 general election, Amesbury won his Runcorn and Helsby constituency for Labour with 22,358 votes (52.9 per cent).

    Reform UK candidate Jason Moorcroft finished second on 7,662 votes (18.1 per cent).

    The Conservative Party candidate, Jade Marsden, came third with 6,756 votes (16.0 per cent).

    No other party achieved over 10 per cent of the vote.

    Amesbury spent three nights in jail last month after he was handed an immediate 10-week sentence at Chester Magistrates’ Court. However, Chester Crown Court later suspended his sentence, allowing him to serve his time in the community instead of behind bars.

    Amesbury told the BBC he carried out casework for his constituents even while behind bars.

    “I actually picked up some casework in prison,” Amesbury said, as his office manager forwarded on “correspondence”.

    “Life doesn’t stop as an MP”, he added.

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    By-election in Runcorn and Helsby would be major test for Labour — and for Nigel Farage

    Source: Politics

  • Ben Obese-Jecty: ‘We must get the future of British cycling back on track’

    If you ask most people why they love the sports that they do, most will have been inspired by watching the sports they love on TV. Be that watching rugby with parents, football down at the pub, Wimbledon in the summer; free sports on TV are a vital part of peoples lives for entertainment. In addition to this, being able to watch sport is one of the key inspirations to getting people involved in their chosen sports, which leads to a healthier, more active society.

    For me, I have always had a love of cycling. I first got the bug by watching the Tour de France on ITV and latterly Eurosport. I soon had a collection of cycling heroes who I aspired to be like. I saved up for my first bike and have not stopped cycling (albeit now as a middle-aged man in lycra past my prime) since.

    Unfortunately, we have now seen the end of the Eurosport with it being merged into TNT Sports. Not only will fans of the Tour de France no longer be able to watch the most important competition in the road cyclist’s diary for free; I fear that the visibility of cycling being even less than it is now will serve as a further hammer blow to the future of the sport.

    Free-to-air coverage means that people do not have to pay to watch the event in question. We have seen the demise in the take-up of other sports when their events move to a wholly subscription-based system. Conversely, we see a spike in people getting into all manner of sports when you have fantastic events like the Olympics which increase the visibility of the 43 events that it hosts.

    The reason why I pushed for a debate on this, is that the lack of free-to-air coverage for cycling has coincided with the end of Britain’s cycling boom. Of course, there is a pipeline of fresh young talent who I have no doubt will make us all proud, but I fear that this will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back and create irreversible damage to the future of one of our sporting success stories.

    Cycling is so much more than just a sport. It has changed lives and saved lives and given people both purpose and freedom. Britain has led the way internationally but, like all things, its continuing success depends upon the next generation being willing to pick up the torch. To do that, children need to be inspired, and parents need to be enthused.

    Many of the parents who I represent will no longer have that opportunity to get enthused if they have to shell out over £31 a month on yet another subscription. For those of us who are already hooked on the sport, we might see this as a necessary investment. However, there is little chance of attracting many new fans nor cyclists at all with this price tag attached.

    With neither the wealth, following nor visibility that sports like football have, action must be taken and taken now. Of course, I understand that the remit that the government has is limited, but I do want to see pressure being put on broadcasting companies. We must ensure that cycling has a strong grassroots movement, and that active travel infrastructure is invested in. All of this and more must be done to secure our Union Jack-clad winning machine that British cycling was not long ago.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Source: Politics

  • Benefits system ‘unsustainable, indefensible and unfair’, Keir Starmer tells Labour MPs

    Britain’s benefits system is the “worst of all worlds”, with the numbers of people out of work or training “indefensible and unfair”, the prime minister has said.

    Keir Starmer, addressing a private meeting of Labour MPs on Monday night, said the current system was “discouraging people from working”.

    He noted that “one in eight young people” are not in education, employment or training, as he rued a “wasted generation”.

    “The people who really need that safety net [are] still not always getting the dignity they deserve”, the prime minister added. 

    “That’s unsustainable, it’s indefensible and it is unfair, people feel that in their bones. It runs contrary to deep British values that if you can work, you should.”

    The comments come as Labour MPs privately voice their disquiet about plans by chancellor Rachel Reeves to slash benefits for the disabled and long-term sick in a bid to balance the books. 

    The speech also came amid anger after the prime minister’s decision to increase defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, by cutting the size of the international aid budget to 0.3 per cent of Gross National Income (GNI). 

    ***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

    The prime minister said: “The real world is moving quickly and people look to their government not to be buffeted about by that change — not even to merely respond to it — but to seize it and shape it for the benefit of the British people.”

    He added: “That is what everything this government does is about. That is how we are clearing the asylum backlog at record pace. 

    “Cutting NHS waiting lists four months in a row — even in winter. Wages rising faster than prices. It’s about seizing the real challenges in front of us to deliver the security people in this country need.”

    Commenting on recent geopolitical developments, the prime minister reflected on recent meetings with US president Donald Trump and Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy. 

    He repeated that his support for Ukraine is “unwavering”.

    Starmer said: “And that is true on the world stage as well. That is why I visited president Trump to work together for the security of Ukraine, Europe and the UK. That is why I hosted president Zelenskyy and other world leaders here in London. 

    “It’s why I have been clear that the security of Ukraine is the future of Europe and our support for Ukraine is unwavering.

    “And that is also why, a couple of weeks ago, I announced the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War. Not just to do our bit for the security of Europe but to secure the future for working people in this country.

    “Our defence and the security of the British people must come first. The extra defence spending I announced last week will rebuild industry across the country. It will support businesses, it will provide good, secure jobs and skills for the next generation. That is what we owe the British people.”

    Turning to the government’s widely trailed welfare reforms, Starmer warned MPs that if nothing is done, the cost of disability and sickness benefits for people of working age will rise to £70 billion annually by 2030.

    He said: “We’ve found ourselves in a worst of all worlds situation — with the wrong incentives — discouraging people from working, the taxpayer funding a spiralling bill, £70 billion a year by 2030.

    “A wasted generation. 1 in 8 young people not in education, employment or training and the people who really need that safety net [are] still not always getting the dignity they deserve.

    “That’s unsustainable, it’s indefensible and it is unfair, people feel that in their bones. It runs contrary to those deep British values that if you can work, you should. And if you want to work, the government should support you, not stop you.

    “So, this needs to be our offer to people up and down the country: if you can work, we will make work pay. If you need help, that safety net will be there for you. But this is the Labour Party. We believe in the dignity of work and we believe in the dignity of every worker.

    “Which is why I am not afraid to take the big decisions needed to return this country to their interests. 

    “Whether that’s on welfare, immigration, our public services or our public finances. We can’t just shrug our shoulders and look away. We can’t just tinker around the edges. We won’t try and sow division or create distractions, we’ll roll up our sleeves, take responsibility and make the reforms needed to fix what is broken.”

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Source: Politics

  • Labour MP warns government’s planned welfare cuts ‘feel like a rerun of austerity’

    A Labour MP has said he is worried that the government’s widely trailed welfare cuts feel “like a rerun of austerity”.

    Neil Duncan-Jordan, the Labour MP for Poole, decried reported plans to cut around £6 billion from the benefits bill — set to include significant cuts to disability support. 

    Duncan-Jordan said: “Cuts to benefits don’t make jobs — they only make more poverty in our society and that’s why I’m very worried about some of the things I’m reading.”

    Speaking to BBC Newsnight, he added: “It feels like a rerun of austerity and I’m worried about that.”

    Austerity refers to the economic programme the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government embarked on after 2010. George Osborne, chancellor from 2010 to 2016, oversaw a series of severe spending cuts and tax increases designed to cut back the UK state and reduce the national debt.

    Duncan-Jordan, who was also critical of the winter fuel payment cut announced last year, said: “If we’re going to make poor people poorer, then there’ll be a number of MPs who won’t be able to sign up to that.”

    ***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

    The backbench MP suggested ministers could instead look at raising revenue from wealthy corporations and individuals.

    The comments come as unease grows in Labour ranks over the severity of the reported cuts, as chancellor Rachel Reeves seeks to balance the books. Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall is expected to outline some of the reforms to health and disability benefits in the coming days.

    Defending his government’s plans on Monday evening, Keir Starmer said the current welfare system was “discouraging people from working”.

    He noted that “one in eight young people” are not in education, employment or training, as he rued a “wasted generation”.

    “The people who really need that safety net [are] still not always getting the dignity they deserve”, the prime minister told a meeting of Labour MPs. .

    “That’s unsustainable, it’s indefensible and it is unfair, people feel that in their bones. It runs contrary to deep British values that if you can work, you should.”

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Benefits system ‘unsustainable, indefensible and unfair’, Keir Starmer tells Labour MPs

    Source: Politics

  • Senior MP stands by claim Trump could be Russian asset: ‘If it quacks like a duck’

    A senior Conservative MP has undertaken to explain his comment that we must consider the “possibility” that the US president is a Russian asset. 

    Graham Stuart, a former Foreign Office minister, initially issued the remark in response to Donald Trump’s decision to pause all military aid to Ukraine. The extraordinary move came as the US administration looked to increase pressure on Volodymyr Zelenskyy to agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Russia.

    Commenting on the developments, Stuart posted to X last week: “We have to consider the possibility that president Trump is a Russian asset. 

    “If so, Trump’s acquisition is the crowning achievement of [Vladimir] Putin’s FSB career — and Europe is on its own.”

    Stuart was asked to explain his position during an appearance on BBC One’s Politics Live programme Monday. Pressed on why he issued the comment questioning the US president’s allegiances, he responded: “Because, well, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…”

    The Conservative MP added: “What more could [Putin] possibly ask of Trump than what Trump is doing?”

    Stuart told the BBC: “What we have got is a president who is making absolutely no demands of the aggressor, the dictator, the man who has subverted Russian society and seeks on a daily basis to subvert our society — as we’ve seen over the years, and yet is making demand after demand and giving insults and abuse to the victim, the sovereign nation of Ukraine, with its heroic president. 

    “And therefore it’s hard not to have it as a possibility. Of course, there’s absolutely no hard and fast evidence, which is why I say it’s a possibility. [But] you look back to [Russian oligarch] Dimitri Rybolovlev’s purchase for $95 million of that palm beach property in 2008 just when Trump needed it most.

    “And you [have] got to ask yourself whether that, or his dealings in the 80s, or indeed his personal deportment — which you can only imagine at certain times, in or outside Russia, might have left him vulnerable to the compromising of a man who is a KGB agent. 

    “That’s what Putin did for his whole professional career. He sought to subvert people, turn them to his will, and if he was wanting to do that right now, what more could he possibly ask of Trump than what Trump is doing?”

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’

    Source: Politics

  • Keir Starmer’s mission to ‘rewire the state’ will test the limits of Labour

    The prime minister addressed a meeting of the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) yesterday evening with a clear message for his natural allies and awkward squad critics alike.

    First came his broader, more abstract pitch. Gazing beyond the crowded committee room, Keir Starmer gestured to a world that is “moving quickly”. The prime minister was plain: when the tectonic plates of global politics shift, people rightly expect the government to seize the moment.

    He told MPs: “The real world is moving quickly and people look to their government not to be buffeted about by that change — not even to merely respond to it — but to seize it and shape it for the benefit of the British people.”

    That, the prime minister added, “is what everything this government does is about.”

    He rolled through a rhetorical catalogue of the government’s purported achievements. “That is how we are clearing the asylum backlog at record pace”, Starmer insisted. “Cutting NHS waiting lists four months in a row — even in winter. Wages rising faster than prices.

    “It’s about seizing the real challenges in front of us to deliver the security people in this country need.”

    ***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

    The PM, having deftly navigated the international turmoil of recent weeks, stands in the ascendant for the first time in months. Starmer has won wide, cross-party praise for his performance on the world stage — after excelling in his Oval Office encounter with Donald Trump and marshalling European leaders on Ukraine.

    After months of relative drift therefore, Starmer finally has a ready stockpile of political capital.

    Foreign policy, it is often said, cannot in and of itself shift the political dial in the government-of-the-day’s favour. But the prime minister’s advisers plainly sense an opportunity. Early indications suggest Starmer’s consummate diplomacy has lightened the public’s appraisal of him — albeit from a dismal low.

    So with the local elections on 1 May and the by-election in Runcorn and Helsby now confirmed, the government is honing its political messaging — and steering attention back to the domestic front.

    Addressing his MPs yesterday, Starmer reflected on recent geopolitical developments and his own diplomatic prominence.

    In this vein, he stressed: “And that is also why, a couple of weeks ago, I announced the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the Cold War. Not just to do our bit for the security of Europe but to secure the future for working people in this country.

    “Our defence and the security of the British people must come first. The extra defence spending I announced last week will rebuild industry across the country. It will support businesses, it will provide good, secure jobs and skills for the next generation. That is what we owe the British people.”

    With this passage, the prime minister addressed his first point of intra-party controversy. The government’s announcement that defence spending will be raised to 2.5 per cent of GDP by 2027, foisted on ministers and the parliamentary party by No 10, was nonetheless largely welcomed. But objections arose when MPs confronted the PM’s chosen trade-off. To fund the defence spending hike, the size of the international aid budget will be cut to 0.3 per cent of Gross National Income (GNI).

    This elicited a furious reaction from Anneliese Dodds, the former international development minister, who resigned her post in protest. Sarah Champion, the Labour chair of the commons international development committee, has proved another public critic. In a speech delivered to the House last week, she said Starmer was personally setting a “dangerous course” by “taking the axe to our most effective tool for reducing global conflicts and for increasing our own national security.”

    But the prime minister’s comments to the PLP yesterday evening serve as the latest indication he remains utterly unapologetic about the move.

    This, after all, is the government’s default stance when it comes to the policy fault lines that slice through Labour — and one Starmer will adopt once again when new welfare cuts are announced later this week.

    ***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

    Addressing MPs yesterday, the prime minister described projected welfare costs to taxpayers of £70 billion a year by 2030 as “unsustainable, indefensible and unfair”.

    He said: “We’ve found ourselves in a worst of all worlds situation — with the wrong incentives — discouraging people from working, the taxpayer funding a spiralling bill, £70 billion a year by 2030.

    “A wasted generation. 1 in 8 young people not in education, employment or training and the people who really need that safety net [are] still not always getting the dignity they deserve.”

    Starmer added: “Whether that’s on welfare, immigration, our public services or our public finances. We can’t just shrug our shoulders and look away. We can’t just tinker around the edges. We won’t try and sow division or create distractions, we’ll roll up our sleeves, take responsibility and make the reforms needed to fix what is broken.”

    The comments amount to a pointed preemptive strike as the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, prepares to announce a £6 billion cut to welfare in her spring statement. The government has already vowed to cut £3 billion over the next three years and is expected to announce billions more in savings from the personal independence payment (PIP), the main disability benefit. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will publish a green paper on sickness and disability benefit reform in the next few days.

    It will mark the latest controversial move after a series of controversial moves. The foreign aid cut last month followed the decision to deny Waspi women compensation — that came after the winter fuel payment cut and the plan to maintain the two-child benefit cap (at least for the foreseeable future).

    In other words: Labour MPs have swallowed a great deal of uncomfortable government decisions since July last year. These are not the policies, suffice it to say, that the median Labour MP strode into politics and parliament to wave through.

    And so consternation is building among the usual suspects. The socialist campaign group — or what remains of it after recent suspensions — is understood to oppose the forthcoming welfare cuts. Outspoken backbenchers Rachel Maskell, Brian Leishman and Neil Duncan-Jordan have also already voiced misgivings.

    But at this moment in time, the prime minister’s loyal Starmtroopers have largely drowned out his would-be detractors. A new Labour caucus called the Get Britain Working Group, formed by 2024 intake MP David Pinto-Duschinsky in recent weeks, stands ready to support the government’s welfare cuts.

    In an open letter addressed to Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, the group states: “Our Labour values are built on a simple but powerful idea: that every individual, regardless of background or circumstance, should have the support they need to make the most of their lives. Everyone who is capable of working deserves the security, dignity and agency that employment offers.”

    The missive, co-signed by 36 Labour MPs, adds: “Of course, there are some people who are not able to work and they must be treated with compassion and respect. But for those that can, we must restore the pathways to opportunity which are currently so sparse for millions of people. It is exactly what a Labour government exists to do.”

    As Starmer readies for another showdown with his party, it would seem that a critical mass of Labour MPs — the vast majority — are still willing to give the government the benefit of the doubt. Intriguingly, we also now recognise the discursive dressing the prime minister will use to sell his welfare cuts politically. The wind of change is blowing, Starmer insists, and the government must not be caught sailing against the mood of the times, or drifting idly by.

    ***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

    No 10 repeated this rhetoric in its readout of cabinet this afternoon. After “updating [colleagues] on the collision between the two vessels in the North Sea yesterday morning”, the notice relates, “the prime minister then turned to the future of the state…

    “He emphasised that recent global events had shown the pace at which the world is changing, and the impact that global insecurity has domestically.

    “He said that to deliver security and renewal we must go further and faster to reform the state, to deliver a strong, agile and active state that delivers for working people.

    “This included cabinet assessing processes and regulations that play no part in delivering the Plan for Change, and the government taking responsibility for decisions rather than outsourcing them to regulators and bodies as had become the trend under the previous government.”

    The readout adds: “The chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster [Pat McFadden] added that this government believes in the power of the state to deliver security and stability, but that the previous government took an outdated approach to forever hiring more people and spending more money.”

    Starmer first observed that the state requires “nothing less than [a] complete re-wiring” in December 2024, upon the appointment of Sir Chris Wormald as cabinet secretary. Events, both diplomatic and domestic, may well have sharpened the government’s focus since.

    Chasing the slipstream of geopolitical developments therefore, Starmer has long passed the point of no return. The final outstanding question is whether the prime minister can take his party with him — or will further Labour MPs be left by the wayside, pontificating progressive objections in his wake?

    Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

    Lunchtime briefing

    Starmer faces first by-election test as MP convicted of assault to stand down

    Lunchtime soundbite

    ‘The Conservative Party has its own procedures on how you join.

    ‘I would welcome anybody into the Conservative Party who like me, so desperately wants to get rid of this socialist government at the earliest opportunity.’

    —   Shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith suggests that the Conservative Party would be willing to accept the defection of Rupert Lowe, who sits as an independent MP after being suspending by Reform UK. Via GB News

    Now try this…

    ‘11 times Nigel Farage had a blazing row with his colleagues’
    From Politico.

    ‘Labour will get Britain working for everyone’
    Deputy PM Angela Rayner writes for The Times. (Paywall)

    ‘Labour rebels are overestimating their numbers – welfare cuts are coming’
    Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall is expected to set out plans shortly, the i’s Kitty Donaldson writes. (Paywall)

    On this day in 2024:

    ‘I want my country back’: Lee Anderson defects to Reform UK as party’s first MP

    Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

    Source: Politics

  • Government to axe payment systems regulator as quango purge begins

    The body charged with overseeing the regulation of payments systems will be abolished, the government has announced. 

    The Payment Systems Regulator (PSR) — which governs payment systems like Faster Payments and Mastercard — is set to be consolidated into the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).

    It follows reports of complaints from businesses that the regulatory environment was too complex, with payment system firms having to engage with three different regulators.

    Downing Street has said this is the latest step in the prime minister’s drive to create an environment that will kickstart economic growth.

    The PSR is given regulatory powers under the Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013, which created the body, as well as competition powers under the Competition Act 1998. Within its remit, it can issue requirements to different parties, and take action against those who breach relevant regulations and directions. The quango (meaning quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation) claims to deliver safe, competitive and innovative payment systems.

    The body came into force in 2015 and is currently chaired by Aidene Walsh, ex-boss of financial wellbeing charity, the Fairbanking Foundation. The PSR employs roughly 160 people, according to its website.

    However, it has been criticised by industry and politicians over its regulatory approach, including in relation to fraud reimbursement by financial services firms.

    ***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

    Announcing the plan, Keir Starmer said: “For too long, the previous government hid behind regulators – deferring decisions and allowing regulations to bloat and block meaningful growth in this country.

    “And it has been working people who pay the price of this stagnation.

    “This is the latest step in our efforts to kickstart economic growth, which is the only way we can fundamentally drive-up living standards and get more money in people’s pockets.

    “That’s why it is the priority in the plan for change, and it’s why I’m not letting anything get in its way.”

    Chancellor Rachel Reeves added: “The regulatory system has become burdensome to the point of choking off innovation, investment and growth. 

    “We will free businesses from that stranglehold, delivering on our plan for change to kickstart economic growth and put more money into working people’s pockets.”

    The government has said that the announcement will not result in any immediate changes to the Payment Systems Regulator’s remit or ongoing programme of work. Rather, the regulator will continue to have access to its statutory powers until legislation is passed by parliament to enact these changes.

    In the interim period, it is said that the PSR and the FCA will work closely to deliver a smooth transition of responsibilities to ensure the market remains competitive.

    The government has vowed to continue to review the entire UK regulatory landscape in a bid to kickstart economic growth.

    The PSR announcement comes after the prime minister told cabinet ministers Tuesday that they must take more responsibility for decisions and stop “outsourcing” them to regulators.

    Starmer said he wants to reverse what he described as a “trend” under the previous government of decisions being made by other bodies.

    A No 10 readout of the prime minister’s contribution to cabinet read: “[Starmer] emphasised that recent global events had shown the pace at which the world is changing, and the impact that global insecurity has domestically. 

    “He said that to deliver security and renewal we must go further and faster to reform the state, to deliver a strong, agile and active state that delivers for working people. 

    “This included cabinet assessing processes and regulations that play no part in delivering the plan for change, and the government taking responsibility for decisions rather than outsourcing them to regulators and bodies as had become the trend under the previous government.”

    ***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

    In December last year, the prime minister and chancellor wrote to around fifteen major regulators — including Ofcom, Ofgem and Ofwat — demanding ideas for how to remove bureaucracy from the economy and more proactively encourage growth.

    Speaking in January, business secretary Jonathan Reynolds signalled that a number of watchdogs could be abolished, saying: “We’ve got to genuinely ask ourselves the question: have we got the right number of regulators?”

    Also in January, the chairman of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), Marcus Bokkerink, was ousted by ministers amid concerns that the body was paying too little heed to UK competitiveness. He was replaced by former Amazon executive Doug Gurr — and the chairman and the chief executive of the Financial Ombudsman Service later confirmed plans to step down.

    The Financial Times reported in February that cabinet ministers were to be instructed to carry out a comprehensive audit of the UK’s roughly 130 regulators, with a view to potentially scrapping some of them.

    The announcement of the decision to scrap the Payment Systems Regulator comes ahead of a planned “intervention” on Thursday in which the prime minister is expected to announce plans to overhaul how the British state works.

    Speaking in the House of Commons on Tuesday, Labour MP Jonathan Hinder argued that governments in recent years have “given too much power away” to unelected bodies.

    Addressing the controversy relating to the new guidelines handed down by the Sentencing Council, Hinder said: “As the secretary of state [for justice] has said, this parliament is sovereign, and the fact is, we’ve given too much power away to these unelected bodies in recent years.”

    Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, responded: “I am very much looking forward to my meeting with the Sentencing Council later this week.

    “And as I’ve made clear, I am looking into the roles and powers of the council and I will not hesitate to legislate if I need to do so.”

    Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Labour MP says governments have ‘given too much power away’ to quangos

    Source: Politics

  • The state is ‘weaker than ever’ — Keir Starmer’s speech-in-full as NHS England axed

    Keir Starmer has announced the government will abolish NHS England, the quango that manages the health service.

    In a major speech in Hull, he said: “In government there was a clear moment when the Tories crossed the Rubicon, it was early, and it was decisive and it sent a signal across Whitehall that was never undone.

    “So today I’m going to reverse it because I don’t see why decisions about £200 billion of taxpayer money on something as fundamental to our security as the NHS should be taken by an arms-length body, NHS England.

    “And I can’t in all honesty explain to the British people why they should spend their money on two layers of bureaucracy.

    “That money could and should be spent on nurses, doctors, GP appointments. So today I can announce we’re going to cut bureaucracy across the state… I’m bringing management of the NHS back under democratic control by abolishing the arms-length body NHS England. That will put the NHS at the heart of government where it belongs.”

    Read the prime minister’s full speech below: 

    It’s really fantastic to be here and to see you. And to celebrate what you’re doing.

    This must be an incredibly exciting place to work.

    Because as Angela said, I went and saw the first bottle of Dettol that you have just in the room around the corner, I think it was 1833 that that bottle was made.

    And for sepsis what a breakthrough that was.

    And then so much that’s happened in the intervening years.

    And as we are here, we’ve got scientists in the labs, probably working on the next breakthrough that you will be involved in.

    So it’s really fantastic to come here to talk to you.

    I’ve just got a few words to say about the way I see the government playing its part in taking our country forward, and then we’ve got some questions from you.

    Let me start with the pledge that we put before you and everybody in the country at the election.

    Because it was a really simple pledge, it was on every leaflet, on every advert, on every speech we all gave.

    That word and pledge was Change. Change.

    And that wasn’t just about an offer to British people.

    It was actually a statement about the world we now live in.

    Change.

    Because we’re in a changing world.

    You can feel it everyday, great forces buffeting and impacting on the lives of working people.

    Particularly at the moment globally, where there’s an instability, I think that we can feel that’s hasn’t been there for years.

    Developing before our very eyes, in relation to the impact it has on the insecurity of working people across the country.

    And that’s why everything we’re doing in relation to Ukraine is so important.

    And you’ve seen the developments in the recent weeks, this week, going on even today.

    Because I profoundly believe that if we don’t secure a just peace and a lasting peace, then that insecurity that we’ve already felt will continue.

    And that means here, higher prices, higher bills and the cost of living crisis going on for even longer – like a chokehold on our future which will be much much harder for us to tackle.

    We know some basics, Putin’s appetite for conflict and for chaos is already there and it will only grow.

    And Russia is already menacing our skies, our waters, our streets, and our national security.

    That’s why I believe that the fundamental task of politics right now is to you take tough decisions on security.

    And that’s why we raised our defence spending.

    Which we also need to use as opportunity to renew our communities.

    Because more now than ever, national security is economic security.

    And strength abroad, and we definitely need that more than ever at the moment, but that demands security back at home.

    Because look, you’re not strong if your energy security is exploited by Putin.

    You’re not strong if 1 in 8 young people are not in education or work.

    And you’re not strong if you lose control of your public finances.

    And you can’t build your industries.

    So that is the test of our times.

    The goal of my Plan for Change.

    National security for national renewal.

    And look – we are making a start, we’re already delivering on this, securing the future though our Plan for Change.

    On the priorities that matter to you and to working people across the country.

    So wages are now going up faster than prices.

    We’re clearing the asylum backlog at a record rate.

    And NHS waiting lists are coming down.

    Now when we started preparing for today I was going to say that NHS waiting lists were coming down four months.

    I can tell you today, the statistics have just come out, that that is 5 months in a row.

    And that’s in winter, it’s really hard to get waiting lists down in winter.

    As you know the pressure on the NHS is much greater in winter.

    Now that’s 5 months of the NHS waiting lists coming down.

    So that is the beginning of the delivery we need.

    But given what has happened globally, given the insecurity in our country, now is the time in my belief for greater urgency and to go further and faster on security and renewal.

    So every pound spent, every regulation and every decision must deliver for working people.

    And I don’t just mean efficiency, although doing what you’re doing you’ll know how important efficiency is, I mean something else, it’s allowing the state to operate at max power.

    Reforming it so it’s closer to communities, tearing down the walls in Westminster and inviting the British people in as partners in business of change.

    To some extent you’re already doing that in the work you’re doing with the NHS – being partners in the change we need to do.

    Having National missions that galvanise the entire country behind them.

    Business, unions, charities pulling together.

    The pride that we all have in our country, harnessed – to rebuild Britain.

    I believe in the power of government.

    I’ve always believed in the power of government.

    I’ve seen it at its best.

    I’ll give you one example last year in the summer when we had those terrible riots, what we saw then in response was dynamic, it was strong and it was urgent.

    It’s what I call active government, on the pitch doing what was needed.

    But for many of us the feeling is that we don’t really have that everywhere, all of the time, at the moment.

    At the moment the state employs more people than it has in decades.

    And yet – look around country

    Do you see good value everywhere?

    Because I don’t.

    I actually think its weaker than it’s ever been.

    Overstretched, unfocussed, trying to do too much, doing it badly, unable to deliver the security that people need.

    I believe that working people want active government – they don’t want a weak state.

    They want it to secure our future.

    They want it to take the big decisions so can get on with their lives.

    We don’t want bigger state, or an intrusive state, an ever-expanding state.

    A state that demands more and more from people as it fails to deliver on core purposes.

    So we’ve got to change things.

    Now the good news is technology can massively help.

    If we push forward with digital reform of government – and we are going to do that, we can make massive savings, £45 billion savings in efficiency.

    AI is a golden opportunity.

    You will already be thinking about how you use it in your work.

    That’s an opportunity we are determined to seize.

    So we are going to get the best of best on AI working across government

    I’m going to send teams into every government department with a clear mission from me to make the state more innovative and efficient.

    But we also need to go further and faster on regulation.

    I want to be really clear about this, it’s not about questioning the dedication or the effort of civil servants.

    It is about the system that we’ve got in place.

    That system was created by politicians.

    The buck stops with us.

    But that’s just it.

    Over a number of years politicians chose to hide behind a vast array of quangos, arms length bodies and regulators, you name it.

    A sort of cottage industry of checkers and blockers using taxpayer money to stop the government delivering on taxpayer priorities.

    Now take our plan build 1.5 million homes.

    That is to restore the dream of home ownership .

    The opportunity and aspiration that home ownership gives people.

    I’d describe it as a base camp for life.

    1.5 million homes we’ve said we will build.

    Now that is a controversial policy.

    There are people across the country who don’t think we should do that.

    We always knew it was contentious.

    We knew that before the election.

    That’s why we put it front and centre in manifesto.

    Because we knew that needed a clear democratic mandate to do what we needed to do.

    And we got that in the election.

    And now we’ve put it in our Plan for Change.

    Yet some parts of the state haven’t got the memo.

    I’ll give you an example – there is an office conversion in Bingley Yorkshire.

    That is an office conversion that will create 139 homes.

    But now the future is uncertain.

    Because regulator was not properly consulted on the power of cricket balls.

    That’s 139 homes.

    Think of the people, the families that want those homes to make their life and now they’re held up.

    Why?

    You’ll decide if this is a good reason.

    I quote: ‘The ball strike assessment doesn’t appear to have been undertaken by a specialist qualified consultant’.

    So that’s what’s holding up these 139 homes.

    Right across Britain people are frustrated, they don’t think politics works for them because it doesn’t deliver on promises.

    How can you justify that?

    That parts of the state see their job as blocking the government from doing the very things it was elected to do.

    You can’t justify it.

    And it’s a pattern.

    Giving you another example – environment regulators stopping clean energy investment.

    Think about that, clean energy, really good for the environment.

    Struggling to get done because of environmental regulators.

    It doesn’t make sense.

    ‘Jumping spiders’ stopping an entire new town.

    I’ve not made that example up, it’s where we’ve got to.

    Infrastructure projects requiring planning documents longer than entire works Shakespeare.

    We’ve created a watchdog state – completely out of whack with the priorities of the British people.

    And it’s unfit for the volatile and insecure world that we live in.

    And I don’t think for one second what public servants want to do

    If you walk around Whitehall, I know we’re recruiting some of best talent in country.

    People who join civil service because they want to serve their country by delivering change.

    Yet somehow – we take that energy, that pride, that patriotism and we misdirect it into blocking.

    Well that’s got to end, no more.

    We were elected to take on blockers and deliver change.

    And that is what we’ll do.

    Well stop the legal challenges that stop building, cut statutory consultees who can veto government activity, hack back the thicket of red tape that stop us getting things done.

    And look, there’s no need to compromise on things like building standards.

    And there’s no good reason building and nature pitted against each other on every single site.

    We can have the best of both, less regulation, more building and a massive scale up in nature with the new Nature Restoration Fund.

    And if you think it’s hard enough for the government and state, and it is and were frustrated and going to change it.

    Imagine what it feels like for small businesses.

    Now I speak to small businesses a lot, and I spoke to a brewer.

    She’s called Alison from Carlisle, she brews beer.

    She tells me it’s ‘proper beer’ – I’ll take her up on that and test it.

    But I’m really struck by how difficult it makes it for the most enterprising people in country to just get on with the job.

    Trading standards advice which changes constantly.

    Long forms on business rates, not able get clear advice when trying to help.

    The example she gave was a boiler grant – and nobody could advise whether their business was eligible for it or not.

    Turns out it wasn’t.

    But she only found that out after hours and hours filling in paperwork.

    That is precious time and money – wasted.

    So that has just got to stop.

    That’s why today I am issuing a new target for our government.

    We will make sure compliance costs for businesses are cut by a quarter.

    Yes that’s 25% compliance costs that are going to go – and they will.

    That’s less red tape, more delivery, renewing our country with growth.

    And look, some people are going to say good luck.

    We’ve heard all this before and we’ve heard some of that this week.

    And to some extent they’re right.

    Because the Tories did talk tough and failed to deliver.

    But that raises question, why is this time different? What was that all about?

    First – as ever, you can’t discount the chaos that we had under the last government.

    Then there is the ideology.

    They never really believed in getting Britain building.

    Don’t believe in power of government, which I do.

    Quite happy to be enfeeble with regulation.

    But I think there is something deeper about Westminster politics here.

    There is a knee jerk response to difficult questions, to difficult lobbies.

    The response goes like this, let’s create an agency, start a consultation, make it statutory, have a review.

    Until slowly, almost by stealth, democratic accountability is swept under a regulatory carpet.

    Politicians almost not trusting themselves, outsourcing everything to different bodies because things have happened along the way – to the point you can’t get things done.

    I accept that all parties have done a bit of this.

    Even the Labour party.

    So today has to be a line in the sand for all of us.

    But also think in government there was a clear moment when the Tories crossed the Rubicon.

    It was early – and it was decisive.

    It sent a signal across Whitehall that was never undone.

    So today I’m going to reverse it.

    Because I don’t see why the decision about £200 billion of taxpayer money on something as fundamental to our security as the NHS should be taken by an arms-length body, NHS England.

    And can’t in all honesty explain to British people why we should spend their money on two layers of bureaucracy.

    That money could and should be spent on nurses, doctors, operation and GP appointments.

    So today – I can announce we’re going to cut bureaucracy across state.

    Focus government on the priorities of the working people and shift money to the frontline.

    So I am bringing management of the NHS back into democratic control.

    By abolishing the arms-length body – NHS England.

    That will put the NHS back at the heart of government where it belongs.

    Freeing it – to focus on patients.

    Less bureaucracy, with more money for nurses, an NHS refocussed on cutting waiting times at your hospital.

    Now, tough choices won’t just stop there.

    In this era, they will keep on coming.

    Our task is clear.

    National security.

    National renewal.

    Driving change forward with a Plan for Change.

    Focussed on the interests of working people.

    Securing our future, together.

    Thank you for listening.

    Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

    Source: Politics