One of the PM’s stock phrases is ‘fixing the foundations.’ Is he the one to do it?
‘Starmer is already in a flat spin from which he will not recover,’ Dominic Cummings said last week (47:46). ‘He has no idea how to do the job… He will just thrash around failing.’
That might not have been obvious from today’s PMQs. The PM appeared to be more animated in his responses; perhaps he had had a little coaching from the increasingly Gollum-resembling Blair who also warned him straight after July’s election that he would have to do something about immigration (what an irony, Tony!)
He was helped by Kemi Badenoch’s repeating her unfortunate habit of asking a two-part question, this time combining the latter issue with another go at his appointment of convicted fraudster Louise Haigh as (now ex-) Transport Secretary. It allowed Sir Keir to focus on his recent remigration achievements: 9,400 repatriated (mostly voluntary, but including 600 Brazilians suddenly rounded up and flown out - the ruthlessness so displayed might backfire.)
For a while, perhaps, given the Tory Opposition that did so disastrously when in power. Cummings says they too ‘will not recover… The machine is broken.’
But immigration is one of those foundations that need fixing, and not just for fiscal reasons. The implications for our politics and social relations are far-reaching.
But when Ed Davey now asked for a full debate Starmer replied ‘Proportional representation is not our policy and we will not be making time for it. I will just gently say to the right hon. Gentleman that he did not do too badly under the system as it is.’
As indeed did Labour, and Sarah Olney’s Conservative debating opponent Lewis Cocking, who held his Broxbourne seat in the GE with only 36.8% of the vote.
So much for power to the people.
A third foundation is our economy, the draught horse that has to pull so much. A great deal of this PMQs session was taken up with worthy causes that require funding:
The North Devon hospital with only 6 ICU beds serving 165,000 people; ‘our prisons bursting’ (said Sir Keir); 1,500 South Wales homes needing festive food hampers (sung for by MP Carolyn Harris); NHS waiting lists; access to GPs; financial support for GP practices; guarding against unacceptable behaviour in the workplace; tackling violence against women and girls; bringing historic buildings back into use; compensation for victims of the contaminated blood scandal; financial redress for WASPI women who saw their retirement date pushed back with inadequate warning; index-linking frozen pensions for British émigrés; heating for pensioners; infrastructure for Middlewich; money for special educational needs and disabilities; staving off Post Office closures; the renationalisation and revival of railways.
How is all this and more to be paid for?
As Kemi said, ‘Last week, the Prime Minister failed to repeat the Chancellor’s pledge of no more borrowing and no more taxes… He cannot even repeat the pledges he made just a few weeks ago. None of [this Cabinet] has ever run a business. Why will the Prime Minister not listen to businesses who are saying his Budget is catastrophic?’
This invited Starmer’s usual counterattack on the Conservative’s economic record and shilly-shallying on policy; can they ever live it down?
Nevertheless, it is one thing to win points in the Debating Chamber; another to build a thriving economy on closing industries and New Age energy. Technically Labour has until 2029 to sort out how the country will make ends meet; in reality we may not have so long.
The recent elections in the USA resulted in Trump sweeping the board, this despite the impression given in all the media that Harris was going ahead in a tight race to the White House. As with so much these days the direction the media wish to take us is not necessarily that which is a true reflection on what is actually happening.
That in itself is a worrying trend. There was a time when the media was fairly impartial in its opinions, now not nearly so much: like everything else it is divided into entrenched camps.
This is not only giving endlessly false readings on events but in many cases it feels, rightly, that opinion is being driven by vested interests.
A good example of that was the unanimous push of government advice during Covid, regardless of any misgivings from many of a different opinion who were completely sidelined.
To a degree one can understand why the dead tree press would obey. The sales of newspapers are but a fraction of a few years ago and many titles are struggling to stay alive, never mind relevant.
The pouring of huge amounts of government money into advertising would make anyone think twice about bucking the trend and losing all that ‘gifted’ revenue.
Elsewhere the feeling with hindsight is that there was a lot of leaning on individuals and corporations to toe the official line and the ‘nudge’ unit did its part in orchestrating all this.
A comment by Pat Condell on X summed up the current thinking among governments and elites at this moment in time:
“The European Union is a model for the planned borderless world run by an unaccountable politburo. Its core purpose is to eliminate the countries of Europe and transform a diverse continent of sovereign nations into a single homogenous political bloc governed by a committee of unelected bureaucrats fronted by a cosmetic rubber stamp assembly.”
Despite the vision of remainers that all who voted for Brexit were knuckle-dragging morons who should not be allowed to vote on anything, many of us shared this view of the EU then and it has been reinforced since Brexit.
We are beginning to see the scales falling from the eyes of many, but not yet enough. This statement has much in it which should be refused but still few in power even acknowledge what is going on yet alone raise doubts and reasoned argument…
Another small taste of what certain politicians regard as the future for us. This has been erased since but was archived by someone who believed it would stand the test of time:
“Remember that time when Hillary Clinton introduced her friend GeorgeSoros and his interest to get involved in US elections? The Internet sure doesn't. Why? Because it has been wiped from existence for the most part. Turns out I found a copy of the file I had archived years ago: https://x.com/i/status/1851690476463628780”
So many paths lead back to Davos; even our new PM has said he prefers Davos to Westminster:
Is he saying that our own democracy is a poor substitute for the elites of Davos? If he is then he has no right to be in the position he now finds himself in, he is a fraud; but then most of them are. Of the current incumbents, the front bench has only one person who has ever worked in the real world for a living, and that one has jusr resigned for a fraudulent crime in the not so distant past. Are any of the others suited to the positions they are hold or are given? As the years pass ever fewer have worked in the private sector in any capacity. This does not bode well.
But then we knew that. His pre-election pledge that the NHS would not receive any more money without reform was ignored like everything else, and a consultation is to be commenced on the reforms that will likely, as with all consultations and inquiries, outlast the government’s tenure.
David Icke is not for me usually a go-to person, yet here he nails it re the farming shut down that appears to be happening simultaneously all over the west.
Back to the NHS. Endless adverts appear telling us that breakthroughs are occurring in the treatment or cure of various diseases, new testing procedures should be insisted on and again all are rightly advised to get tested and pop down immediately to see their GP…
I cannot see all this money spent on advertising as any more than a distraction to the fact that the NHS is failing in many areas and very little will be achieved while waiting lists for standard procedures stretches out into, in many cases a time when the patient will be gone. Perhaps this is the plan; it is a fact that the last six months of anyone's life is the most expensive for the NHS should they need care.
Perhaps the assisted dying bill being presented to Parliament is part of the planned process to eliminate old people before they become a burden on the state.
My own views on this aspect of medical care (sic) have been aired on here in detail, so I won’t be going over old ground, but just a point: the ‘end of life bill ‘ before Parliament and which has just been passed, has no mention of the fact that lives are ended in hospitals and care homes on a regular basis with none of the ‘safety’ provisions that are being put before Parliament in this private member’s bill. That is happening and to say the situations are not comparable is a lie in many cases. It leaves a huge loophole in the law that can be, as during Covid, be exploited. Those responsible for that lawful murder have walked away untouched with their gold-plated pensions intact, and now that ability to end life has been extended.
Old people have very little future to look forward to. They have been discarded or are being so little by little. This once great nation has currently, despite all the bluster to the contrary, probably the worst pensions in the so called advanced western nations, and the withholding of the Winter Fuel Allowance was a deliberate mean act to a group who if they were still workng would be classified as existing well below the poverty line.
These are people who have done more than their bit for this country, paid their taxes, are crapped on from above and are now being told their lives have no value as they are a drag on the State.
And the lies, the endless lies… this from someone who claims there is an imaginary black hole in the finances, yet manages to find billions for nonsense schemes in Africa, public sector wage increases, billions for illegal migrants who get free private health care and free heated hotel rooms plus plus plus…
Can’t say she never acted!
What the hell has happened to us as a nation when this bleak and unholy future is all that can be offered?
The PM replied that July’s General Election had been a petition (really it was more like an eviction order.) ‘The Mongoose’ missed a trick: the 4 July petitioners didn’t get what they asked for and got a lot they didn’t want.
Kemi raised the issue of employer’s NIC again - but Starmer countered that she and her shadow Science Minister had been contradicting each other as to whether they would reverse it. Fair comment; ‘Get that man’s number, sergeant!’
Quoting the head of McVitie’s doubts about the case for investment in the UK, Badenoch could not resist some biscuit jokes, stonily ignored by the PM. Part of his technique in handling the ‘tribal shouting match’ of Westminster is to dampen the mood like a Seventies movie’s downer ending.
Challenged to repeat the Chancellor’s pledge to the CBI not to borrow or tax more, Starmer demurred and resorted to his stock litany: ‘fixing the foundations [used twice]… £22 billion black hole… not hit the payslips of working people.’
Speaking of work, there were the 1,100 car jobs to be lost at Vauxhall in Luton, thanks in part to the commitment to ban new petrol vehicles by 2030. When Sir Keir reminded Badenoch that the EV mandates had been set by the Tories she replied that they had changed the date to make it easier for people. (We could have hoped for more ‘clear blue water’; perhaps this is another case of too much cross-party consensus.) Luton was also raised by Labour’s Rachel Hopkins; the PM responded with vague comments about ‘working with’ and ‘support’ and said there would be a statement later that day.
Ed Davey’s concern about the removal of winter fuel payments was similarly fended off by reference to Labour’s commitment to ‘clean energy’ and its potential to cut pensioner’s bills. So much depends on that bet, does it not? Let’s hope that the dark hypnotic gaze of Ed Miliband has not misled us.
Another of Davey’s queries, hooked on a tragic constituent’s story, was about underfunded end of life care (the ‘Doctor Death’ Bill will be debated again tomorrow) and the impact of the NIC hike on hospices; Sir Keir sort-of answered it by general reference to a ten-year plan for the NHS.
Like Kemi, the SNP’s Stephen Flynn attempted humour, linking the BBC’s scam awareness week with Labour’s energy bills, business taxes and pensioner robbery. This attracted the PM’s usual counterattack on the SNP’s performance and when his friend Frank McNally later raised the issue of Scotland’s clinical waste disposal Starmer was glad to say that that nation’s government now had powers, money and no excuses left. Such a joy, devolution; no wonder he looks forward to feet-up-Friday.
Enter the special interest people. Reform’s Rupert Lowe wanted stats on ‘foreign nationals receiving Universal Credit’; the PM promised them ‘as soon as I have an update.’
Imran Hussain (Independent) asked for a definition of Islamophobia and a commitment to root it out; Starmer widened his answer to include antisemitism. Labour’s Tahir Ali asked for protection against desecration of ‘all religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions’; Sir Keir said Labour was ‘committed to tackling all forms of hatred and division.’ Long-term, he faces a delicate balancing act.
We revisited the question of farmers and the changes to Agricultural Property Relief. Civil servants had belatedly done a little more homework so that Starmer was able to say that the threshold for paying Inheritance Tax on farms was £3 million in the case of ‘parents passing to a child.’ This is a complex matter and even the Lib Dems’ explainer does not quite do it justice. (E.g. one parent or two? How far, if at all, would the Residence Nil-Rate Band apply? More paperwork for Farmer and Mrs Giles after they’ve filled out forms for MAFF, DEFRA etc.)
While expressing gratitude for the Government’s setting matters right for mineworkers and their pension scheme, Ian Lavery (Labour) raked over the forty-year-old coals of policing the miners’ protests at Orgreave. Watch this space: it could be a fruitful source of stored-up political bitterness to aim at the Opposition.
Hailing from Victoria, British Columbia (Coast Salish Territories), Knacker’s Yard has been arranging and performing traditional Irish, Scottish, English, Australian, and original music since 2013.
The band pays tribute to, and takes inspiration from, legendary predecessors such as The Dubliners, Pogues, Planxty, The Battering Ram, The Clancy Brothers, The Chieftains, and The Wolfe Tones. https://knackersyard.net/home/
Knacker's Yard - Farewell To Nova Scotia (The New West Session)
Knacker's Yard - Dirty Old Town (The New West Session)
Knacker's Yard - Finnegan's Wake
Knacker's Yard - The Merry Ploughboy (Irish Rebel Song)
Taking his place was Angela Rayner, the toughie redhead, and deputising for Kemi Badenoch as per convention was Alex Burghart, the Conservatives’ Shadow NI Minister.
Once again, the cockpit of the Chamber is less satisfactory when both sides agree. Angie’s opening remarks included a reference to ‘Putin’s barbaric war in Ukraine. We will stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.’ Even now few mainstream journalists other than Peter Hitchens are prepared to give the history and context to that conflict. It is one that has become especially ominous now that President Biden has (perhaps consciously) authorised Zelensky’s use of long-range missiles against Russia, and the latter has changed its nuclear doctrine to include Ukraine’s backers. Burghart seconded Rayner, as did Daisy Cooper (Lib Dem).
Graham Stuart (Con) aimed a shot at Rachel Reeves’ claim to have worked as an economist, but misfired. Perfunctory research reveals that like Nigel Lawson Reeves got her Oxford degree in PPE and further, her MSc at the LSE was in economics. What matters is not the Chancellor’s over-egged CV (since amended) but her policies, and Angie countered with ‘in the last four months our Chancellor has shown more competence than the last four Chancellors that were appointed by his Government.’ Now that claim really does need unpacking.
Like her boss, Rayner is fond of repetition: she said thrice that the previous Government had ‘spent the reserves three times over.’ But when she contrasted the (currently modest) inflation now building in the economy with the 11 per cent under the Conservatives Burghart quickly reminded her of Ukraine and Covid, (measures on both of which matters Labour had been strongly supportive.)
Reeves’ inheritance tax raid on farmers was a live issue. The Lib Dem’s Daisy Cooper cited a constituent’s family who, if forced to sell land to meet the charge, would find their food production economically unviable. Replying to a Midlands MP on the same problem, Rayner repeated Starmer’s claim that ‘the vast majority of farms will not pay any inheritance tax’; yet Burghart had earlier quoted the NFU’s estimate that ‘75% of all commercial farms will fall above the threshold.’ Yesterday Badenoch got a great cheer when she told the farmers’ rally in London that Conservatives would cancel that tax at the first opportunity.
What was John McTernan thinking when he said Britain didn’t need small farmers and would treat them as Thatcher had treated the miners if they protested? Even Sir K had to dissociate himself from that. And what was on ‘posh wellies’ Steve Reed’s mind when he told the Parliamentary environment committee that farmers should consult their tax advisers if the IHT caused them difficulty? What if all farmers sold up and emigrated to somewhere warmer and more sane?
And then there is the ongoing row about the rise in employers’ NIC. Speakers for the Lib Dems and Plaid Cymru both raised the implications for care workers, who (it was said last week) might not get compensation for the increased cost; as indeed could be the case for other Local Authority contracted-out services.
The bigger picture with the NIC debacle is that the Government has to some extent tried to give back with one hand what it has taken with the other, using additional funding in the case of LAs and the NHS; and by increasing the Employer’s Allowance (a discount of up to £10,500) for small businesses.
But parish and town councils will not qualify for compensation at all and expect the additional cost to them will be £10 million. The voluntary and charity sector, also struggling, estimates that without similar compensation or exemption the NIC hike will cost it £1.4 billion and impact services. GPs estimate it will cost them £260 million (the poor underpaid and overworked things - seen one recently? Tell Big Chief I-Spy!)
On the whole the public sector and micro businesses will be cushioned.
Not so, medium and large private enterprises - compare Scenarios 4 and 5 in this explainer. They face a significant extra burden, in an economic climate that is already difficult.
But they also have the resources and now an additional motivation to accelerate the trend towards replacing people with machines. AI, robots and automated checkouts don’t get sick or sue their employers. Taxing employment may have more success in reducing it than with harmful indulgences like alcohol and tobacco. A Labour Government claiming to represent the interests of ‘working people’ may see fewer of them and more claiming benefits instead.
Rather than changing the borrowing rules and going for broke, the Government should consider retrenching - on vanity projects like HS2, on foreign aid and foreign war, on expensive new-Eden energy ideas that make our industry increasingly uncompetitive, on ‘restoring our role as a climate leader on the world stage’… We have to cut our coat according to the cloth.
Unless the West succeeds in provoking Russia into nuclear retaliation, in which case pensioners need not fear freezing to death. Shame about the polar bears, though.
