Connect with us

Politics

Raising employers’ national insurance would be ‘clear breach’ of Labour manifesto, say Tories – UK politics live | Politics

Published

on

Key events

Opening summary

Good morning. Conventional wisdom (often citing George Bush, and his “Read my lips, no new taxes” pledge) says that it is fatal for politicians to break election promises. In reality, that is not always the case. David Cameron never came close to meeting his 2010 commitment to get net migration below 100,000, and that did not stop him being re-elected in 2015 (although it did help him lose the 2016 Brexit referendum). There were many reasons why Boris Johnson was forced out of office, but raising national insurance in breach of a 2019 manifesto promise is not usually seen as one of his career-ending mistakes.

Nevertheless, breaking a promise is a huge risk, and that is why the very strong hints that Rachel Reeves will raiser employers’ national insurance in the budget has opened up a key debate. As Richard Partington and Kiran Stacey report, Labour is arguing that its pledge not to raise national insurance only covered employees’ national insurance, because the party repeatedly talked about taxes on working people.

Advertisement

But the Conservatives are saying people clearly took the promise to cover all national insurance. Laura Trott, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, issued this statement last night, after Reeves gave an interview clarifying her interpretation of the Labour pledge. Trott said:

The chancellor has chosen Labour’s first investment summit to sow further uncertainty and chaos for businesses who are now braced for Labour’s Jobs Tax.

Regardless of what they say, it’s obvious to all that hiking employer national insurance is a clear breach of Labour’s manifesto. Rachel Reeves herself previously called it anti-business and we agree, it is a tax on work that will deter investment, employment and growth, and the OBR says it will lower wages.

Keir Starmer is giving an interview to BBC Breakfast at 8.30am, so we are likely to hear his take then.

Here is the agenda for the day.

Advertisement

9.30am: Keir Starmer chairs a meeting of political cabinet.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

11.30am: Wes Streeting, the health secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

After 12.30pm: MPs debate the second reading of the House of Lords (hereditary peers) bill, which will remove the right of remaining hereditary peers to sit in the Lords.

Advertisement

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line (BTL) or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.

If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. I’m still using X and I’ll see something addressed to @AndrewSparrow very quickly. I’m also trying Bluesky (@andrewsparrowgdn) and Threads (@andrewsparrowtheguardian).

I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos (no error is too small to correct). And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.

Share
Advertisement

Updated at 

Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Politics

Some Home Office staff to get pay rise of over 9%

Published

on

Some Home Office staff to get pay rise of over 9%

Some Home Office staff are getting an inflation-busting 9% pay rise, the department has confirmed.

The union representing civil servants, PCS, welcomed the deal, which is nearly double the 5% agreed for most civil servants.

The pay boost is meant to improve staff retention and morale, which is the lowest in the civil service.

But Conservative MP Neil O’Brien said the pay hike would “stick in the craw” of people worried about immigration and crime.

Advertisement

The BBC understands the pay rises will be backdated to the start of July and will range from 6% to 9.1% for executive officers working outside of London.

Inflation is running at 2.2%, according to the latest figures.

But the PCS union said its members “deserve rises significantly above inflation to reclaim pay that we have lost through years of below-inflation rises”.

The Home Office’s most recent annual report showed the cost of hiring temporary agency staff had tripled on the last two years to more than half a billion pounds, most of which was spent on dealing with illegal immigration, as well as the now-cancelled Rwanda deal.

Advertisement

A Home Office spokesman said the pay rises were in line with the civil service pay remit guidance.

He said: “This year’s pay guidance recognises the hard work and vital importance of all our staff and is broadly in line with others in the public sector.

“One relatively junior grade in a particular region has received the higher amount to bring them into line with their peers.”

PCS general secretary Fran Heathcote said she would continue to push for a “fair and sustainable long-term pay settlement” to make up for “many years” of below-inflation pay.

Advertisement

She said: “We have made progress in negotiations with the Home Office and we welcome the fact that the final offer would deliver increases for the admin and executive grades that are above the 5% headline figure in the civil service remit.

“We believe this is the best award that can be delivered through departmental negotiations alone.”

However, critics have questioned whether the recent performance of the Home Office staff justified a bumper pay rise.

The move comes as the number of migrants who have crossed the Channel in small boats so far this year topped 29,000, approached the total for the whole of last year.

Advertisement

O’Brien said: “I have no problem with people being rewarded for good performance.

“But with massive numbers crossing the channel, crime clear-up rates low and dangerous people getting let out of jail, this large pay rise will stick in the craw of a lot of people.”

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Couple given go-ahead to sue governments over winter fuel payment

Published

on

Couple given go-ahead to sue governments over winter fuel payment

A Scottish couple have been given permission to proceed with a legal bid to overturn the scrapping of the universal winter fuel benefit for all pensioners.

Peter and Florence Fanning, from Coatbridge in North Lanarkshire, have argued both the UK and Scottish governments failed to adequately consult with those of pension age and did not release an equality impact assessment on the changes.

The judicial review required a judge’s approval to move to a full hearing, which has been given.

A hearing at the Court of Session in Edinburgh is now scheduled for 15 January.

Advertisement

The case will ask the Court of Session to rule on whether the decision to scrap the universal benefit was unlawful.

This would allow the petitioners to ask the court to, in effect, set aside the policy and restore the winter fuel payment to all.

A spokesperson for Govan Law Centre, which has taken the case for the Fannings, said their clients were “delighted” that permission had been granted.

They added they were awaiting a decision next week on whether civil legal aid from the Scottish Legal Aid Board would be granted.

Advertisement

The controversial decision has been criticised by trade unions and groups representing older people.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves previously announced the benefit needed to be means- tested from this winter due to a £22m “black hole” in public finances that she said Labour had inherited from the previous Conservative government.

The benefit is devolved but the Scottish government said it had to follow suit as £160m had been taken out its budget.

Mr Fanning stated in September that the decision created “manifest injustice” for those affected.

Advertisement

The couple were being supported by former Scottish first minister Alex Salmond, who put them in touch with Govan Law Centre and called the payment being scrapped “unacceptable”.

The Alba party leader has since died after suffering a heart attack in North Macedonia.

First Minister John Swinney said last month that he understood public concerns about the payment but that the Scottish government was having to face “hard reality” regarding budgets.

Earlier this month the SNP tabled a Holyrood motion calling on Sir Keir Starmer to reverse the decision.

Advertisement

A spokesperson for the UK government previously said it was committed to supporting pensioners and that millions would see their state pension rise by £1,700 during this parliament.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Many African kings opposed eradicating slavery

Published

on

Many African kings opposed eradicating slavery

The government should “unequivocally reject” calls for the UK to pay reparations for its role in the slave trade, Tory leadership candidate Robert Jenrick has said.

He said calls for the UK to pay reparations were “based on false and misleading narratives about our past”.

Britain “worked harder than nearly any other country to eradicate the practice” in the 19th century, adding that the campaign against slavery was “opposed by many African kings”.

There have been attempts to get reparations discussed at a meeting of the 56 Commonwealth countries in Samoa.

Advertisement

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has already ruled out making payments, telling the BBC: “That’s not something that this government is doing.”

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the slave trade was “abhorrent” but that it would be better to focus on “today’s challenges” such as climate change.

Caribbean countries have been particularly keen to press the issue. Earlier this week, Bahamas foreign minister Frederick Mitchell told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that reparations were not just about money but a matter of “respect, acknowledging the past was wrong and needs to be corrected”.

Kemi Badenoch, Jenrick’s opponent in the Tory leadership race, said the government was facing reparation demands because Labour politicians had “spent their time in opposition supporting these sort of fringe, unnecessary causes under the guise of decolonisation”.

Advertisement

“Now the British public are waking up to the reality of a Labour government that is ashamed of its own country – giving away the Chagos Islands, watering down Britain’s influence at the UN, and reducing our support for Israel in their fight against terror.

“If I am leader of the opposition I will ensure Keir Starmer is held to account for his deplorable actions.”

Reparations are actions that can be taken to amend for past wrongs. For example, in 2013, the UK government paid £19.9m to 5,000 elderly Kenyans who had been tortured by British colonial forces in the 1950s.

From the 16th century, the British government, along with other European countries, participated in the transatlantic slave trade.

Advertisement

It is estimated that between 1500 and 1800 around 12 -15 million people were trafficked from African countries to be used as enslaved labour in the Caribbean, North, Central and South America. Around two million died on the journey to the Americas.

Having been one of the big beneficiaries of the trade, Britain had a key role in ending the practice and abolished slavery in 1833.

As part of the policy, British plantation owners were paid £20m for the loss of their slaves, creating a debt the UK only finished paying off in 2015.

Addressing the Henry Jackson Society think tank in London, Jenrick said: “It was Britain that spent 1.8% of GDP between 1808 and 1867 on eradicating slavery – the most expensive moral foreign policy on human history.”

Advertisement

“It was a campaign in fact opposed by many African Kings.

“The West African squadron sacrificed their lives for liberty and freedom and it is high time that we recognise their contribution with a national memorial to honour them and everything that they did.”

The Royal Navy squadron was tasked with stopping vessels transporting slaves and was involved in freeing around 150,000 slaves in the 19th century.

Just as European nations were enriched themselves through the slave trade, some African slave sellers also profited from the practice.

Advertisement

Jenrick said calls for the UK to pay reparations were “based on false and misleading narratives about our past”.

Last year, a UN judge co-authored a report which estimated that the UK should pay £18.8tn for its involvement in slavery.

The report said the harm caused by the slave trade was “vast” adding: “Its repercussions resonate in the lives of descendants of the enslaved to this day.”

It also argues that descendants “even to this day” have lower incomes and poor health outcomes.

Advertisement

Historian Professor Sir Hilary Beckles told the report that slavery had led to the black population in the Caribbean experiencing high levels of diabetes, with Barbados and Jamaica “competing for the title of ‘Amputation Capital of the World.’”.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Chess fanatic playing Labour’s first big gambit

Published

on

Is Reform UK's plan to get Farage into No 10 mission impossible?
Reuters Rachel Reeves at a campaign event, with people seen blurred in the backgroundReuters

“Serious” and “determined” are words often used to describe Rachel Reeves, the UK’s first female chancellor.

But colleagues and friends have suggested the Labour MP’s public persona does not reflect her human side, with a loud laugh and deep love of Beyoncé tracks.

In her maiden speech in the House of Commons in 2010, she vowed to fight for “jobs, growth and prosperity” – likely centrepieces of Labour’s first Budget in nearly 15 years, on 30 October.

So who is Reeves, and how is she addressing the economic and financial challenges the country faces?

Reeves was born in south-east London in 1979, just months before Margaret Thatcher became prime minister at a time of immense social and economic change.

Advertisement

She has previously told the BBC her mother would tick off items on a bank statement against receipts while sitting at the kitchen table: “We weren’t poor, but we didn’t have money to waste.”

Her parents separated when she was at primary school, and she and younger sister Ellie, also a Labour MP, were shuttled between separate homes.

During the school holidays, the sisters would spend time with their grandparents in the Northamptonshire town of Kettering.

They would be taken to do the rounds of relatives’ houses, who would give them a 20p or 50p piece each. At the end of their week, they were taken to the local toy shop to choose their goodies. While Ellie would spend all her cash, the young Rachel would allow herself a smaller treat and save most of the money.

Advertisement

Decades later, Chancellor Reeves would say that kind of restraint defines her, and she has very much modelled herself on Gordon Brown’s “prudence” in the lead-up to Labour’s 1997 election win.

Chess talent

Reeves played chess from an early age, with her father teaching her the key moves. She became a national under-14 champion, and would “quietly thrash” any boys who might think they were in for an easy game, according to Ellie.

She has credited chess with teaching her “to think ahead, to plan a strategy”.

Advertisement

A keen flute player, she took her music GCSE a year early at Beckenham’s Cator Park School for Girls, a comprehensive, and would go on to gain four A grades at A-level.

Seeing the extent of cuts at her school, where the library had been turned into a classroom and the sixth form consisted of “two pre-fab huts in the playground”, she has said she was politicised by her own experience of public services. At the age of 16, she joined the Labour Party.

She went on to study Philosophy, Politics and Economics at Oxford University. As a student, she would host others before college discos, blasting out Destiny’s Child songs and dressing up in her room.

Rachel Reeves: The basics

Advertisement

Age: 45

Place of birth: Lewisham, south-east London

Education: New College, Oxford and the London School of Economics

Family: Married to Nicholas Joicey, a senior civil servant and former speechwriter to Gordon Brown during his time as chancellor. They have two children. Her sister is Labour Party chair Ellie Reeves.

Advertisement

Parliamentary constituency: Leeds West and Pudsey

PA Rachel Reeves (left) and her sister Ellie Reeves seen laughing together, sitting next to each other at a campaign rally PA

Rachel Reeves with her sister Ellie Reeves, who is also a Labour MP

After graduating, Reeves took on a role as an economist at the Bank of England.

She worked on the central bank’s Japan desk, looking at the country’s attempts to come out of stagnation in the 1990s.

During a secondment to the UK embassy in Washington, she met her future husband Nicholas Joicey, who had spent time as a film critic for newspapers and as a speechwriter to then-Chancellor Gordon Brown.

Advertisement

The path to Parliament was not an easy one though. There were two failed campaigns for the former seat of Bromley and Chislehurst, typically safe for the Conservatives.

Before becoming MP for Leeds West in 2010, Reeves moved to the city and spent time working there for the retail arm of Halifax Bank of Scotland.

She once had an interview for a job at investment bank Goldman Sachs, but turned it down. She said: “I could have been a lot richer.”

Entering Parliament, an early mentor on economic policy was Alistair Darling – the last Labour chancellor, during the financial crisis.

Advertisement

At his funeral last December, Reeves spoke fondly of enjoying lasagne and red wine with him and his wife.

She quickly rose up the party’s ranks, shadowing roles at the Treasury, Work and Pensions, and the Cabinet Office.

Brushes with controversy

While a friend has described her as politically “as hard as nails”, Reeves’ time in Westminster has not been without controversy.

Advertisement

She was accused of “utter hypocrisy” for paying students working in her offices only expenses, rather than a salary. She argued the students were on work placements and getting maintenance support.

Throughout Jeremy Corbyn’s four and a half years as Labour leader, she remained on the backbenches because she felt she could not endorse his policies. Called a “Red Tory” by some in the party, she described this as a “very unpleasant period” in an interview with the BBC’s Nick Robinson.

A former editor of the BBC’s Newsnight programme was forced to issue a written apology to Reeves after calling her “boring snoring” on social media in a post that was meant to be a private message.

While she said the incident was “deeply humiliating”, her key objective after Sir Keir Starmer appointed her shadow chancellor was to portray Labour as a steady, pro-business hand on the economy.

Advertisement

Last October, she admitted she “should have done better” after it emerged some passages in her book, The Women Who Made Modern Economics, had been lifted from other sources without acknowledgment.

She told the BBC some sentences “were not properly referenced” and this would be corrected in future reprints. The Conservatives mockingly called her a “copy and paste shadow chancellor”.

Getty Images Rachel Reeves and Ed Balls, pictured in 2012 visiting a social housing project with other Labour frontbench colleagues, wearing yellow high-vis jackets and red hard hatsGetty Images

Rachel Reeves served as shadow chief secretary to the Treasury under Ed Balls (right), pictured in 2012

Following Labour’s landslide victory in July’s general election, Reeves was confirmed as the first woman to hold the office of chancellor in its 800-year history.

That was “beyond what a girl like me, from the ordinary background that I came from, could have ever dreamed of,” she recently told BBC Radio 5 Live’s Matt Chorley.

Advertisement

Among a number of early government announcements, she cancelled several infrastructure projects and approved a series of public sector pay rises.

But Reeves will not be delivering her first Budget until the end of October, nearly four months after arriving at the Treasury.

‘Black hole’

Labour argued the time was needed to allow the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to properly assess the state of the UK economy. In 2022, Conservative Prime Minister Liz Truss and Chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng had sidestepped OBR scrutiny of their disastrous mini-budget.

Advertisement

But critics said the Budget was the new government’s main lever of change, and that therefore leaving it so long after taking office was a political error.

During the election campaign, Reeves had predicted Labour would inherit the worst economic situation since 1945. In July, she said a spending audit had uncovered a £22bn “black hole” in the public finances left by the previous government.

The Conservatives cried foul and accused Labour of not telling voters the truth about its intention to put up taxes.

During that campaign, independent analysts such as the Institute for Fiscal Studies observed that ruling out increases in income tax, National Insurance and VAT would severely limit Reeves’ room for manoeuvre in the Treasury.

Advertisement

Government sources have told the BBC the chancellor is now looking for tax rises and spending cuts totalling £40bn in the Budget.

One change she announced early was the scrapping of winter fuel payments for millions of pensioners not receiving means-tested benefits. It has proved highly controversial.

Another move unveiled ahead of the Budget was to change the way government debt is measured, to free up billions of pounds of extra investment in infrastructure projects such as roads, railways and hospitals.

Getty Images Chancellor Rachel Reeves delivers her speech to the Labour Party conference in September Getty Images

Rachel Reeves became the first chancellor to address a Labour conference in 15 years

Reeves is determined to remedy the UK’s long-term record of under-investment, setting up a £7bn national wealth fund to encourage private investment in green sectors and repeatedly emphasising the new government’s pro-business credentials.

Advertisement

As she prepares to deliver Labour’s first Budget since 2010, the chancellor has revealed she often chats to a number of senior figures.

“I speak to Gordon [Brown] regularly – I also speak to Tony Blair regularly,” she told Matt Chorley.

Despite their political differences, she also maintains a “good relationship” with Conservative predecessor Jeremy Hunt, she said.

“I may not be particularly impressed with the state of the public finances that he left me, but I do recognise that after Kwasi Kwarteng, he had a tough job to do as well.”

Advertisement

Reeves is politically close to Sir Keir, and also revealed they speak at least once a day, wherever the prime minister is in the world.

But there is a warning from a Labour veteran of the Blair-Brown era, former cabinet minister Lord Blunkett, that she needs to offer the public more hope and less gloom.

He told the BBC Reeves had “been left a terrible hand”, but that “post-Covid, we are a tired nation”, so “more miserableness won’t do”.

He also cautioned that this Budget would probably define the next five years, and that if Labour was going to win a second term, “you have to keep a degree of popularity”. As the Conservatives had found out, he added, “once you’ve lost it, it takes a very very long time to pull it back”.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Keir Starmer struggles to define ‘working people’ tax pledge

Published

on

Is Reform UK's plan to get Farage into No 10 mission impossible?
Getty Images Keir Starmer at a Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in SamoaGetty Images

Sir Keir Starmer has attempted to define who “working people” are, amid renewed scrutiny of his tax plans ahead of next week’s Budget.

Labour promised at the general election not to increase taxes on working people – but it is looking to raise some taxes to fund public services.

This could include increases in tax on the sale of assets, such as shares and property, a freeze on income tax thresholds and changes to inheritance tax.

Sir Keir has repeatedly been asked whether “working people” would be hit by these changes.

He insists they won’t but has struggled to offer a clear definition of what counts as a working person in the government’s eyes.

Advertisement

In an interview during a Commonwealth leaders’ summit, the prime minister was asked whether those who work, but get additional income from assets such as shares or property, would count as working people.

He replied that they “wouldn’t come within my definition” – but warned against making “assumptions” about what that meant for tax policy.

He said he thought of a working person as someone who “goes out and earns their living, usually paid in a sort of monthly cheque” and who can’t “write a cheque to get out of difficulties”.

Speaking afterwards, his spokesman sought to clarify that those with a “small amount of savings” could still be defined as working people.

Advertisement

This could include cash savings, or stocks and shares in a tax-free Individual Savings Accounts (ISA), he suggested.

But ministers have been reluctant to translate these comments into numbers.

‘Hypotheticals’

The prime minister accepted that his own definition was “broad”.

Advertisement

Those people he had in mind, he added, were those who were “doing alright” but had an “anxiety in the bottom of their stomach” about making ends meet if something unexpected happened to their family.

The issue has taken on a central political importance ahead of next Wednesday’s Budget, Labour’s first since 2010, amid a row over whether the party is sticking to promises it made in its election manifesto.

During a BBC interview back in the UK, Treasury minister James Murray was asked repeatedly to give a more precise answer.

When asked whether someone who owned shares or sold a business could be a working person, he said he would not “get into too many hypotheticals”.

Advertisement

Minister asked if landlords count as ‘working people’

As well as the broad pledge not to raise taxes for working people, Labour’s manifesto specifically ruled out raising rates of income tax, along with National Insurance and Value Added Tax (VAT).

But ministers have not ruled out continuing to freeze income tax thresholds beyond 2028, a policy they inherited from the Conservatives, dragging more people into higher bands over time as wages rise with inflation.

And they have also not ruled out making employers pay National Insurance on their contributions to workers’ pension pots, which the Conservatives have branded a “tax on work” that will indirectly hit workers.

Advertisement

Labour peer Lord Blunkett, a cabinet minister in the Blair government, said the “logical outcome” of the move was that “employers will pay less”.

He also cautioned that he was unsure of the government’s definition of a working person, adding: “We’ve got to find a different phraseology”.

Other rumoured tax rises include to capital gains tax, which is paid on profits made by selling assets including shares and property other than a main home.

The government is also planning to increase the amount of money it raises in inheritance tax, which is paid after around 4% of deaths.

Advertisement

Multiple changes to the tax, which currently includes several exemptions and reliefs, are under consideration.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Minister put on spot over ‘working people’ definition

Published

on

Minister put on spot over 'working people' definition

Treasury minister James Murray was asked to define “working people” amid speculation that the chancellor could raise some taxes in the Budget next week.

Murray said the government will keep its manifesto promise to “protect working people”, but he did not answer directly when asked if that group includes landlords, people who own shares or who sell a business.

“Working people are people who go out to work for their income,” he told presenter Nick Robinson on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Friday morning.

Asked for a fifth time if he would count landlords among that group, Murray said: “I’m not going to get into too many hypotheticals here, Nick.”

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 WordupNews.com