Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Society

Labour will be judged on deeds not words

LABOUR PARTY

THE CHANCELLOR, Rachel Reeves, with a rictus smile glued to her face at the Labour Party conference this week has sought to change the government’s central message from one of unremitting gloom to one of hope.

After weeks of relentless negativity over alleged black holes, broken Britain and “tough decisions” ahead, the Chancellor has laid out her vision for the promised land to come.

No one could argue with most of it. Who wouldn’t want a fairer society, great public services, better schools, higher growth, and a strong economy? However, Ms Reeves offered no discernible strategy for achieving these admirable goals. Nor did she touch on the price we will all have to pay.

Many will be surprised to hear her say there would be “no return to austerity”.

For millions of pensioners stripped of their winter fuel allowance it has already arrived and the Budget on October 30 is expected to be an assault on the finances of middle Britain.

The Chancellor claims she will not raise taxes on “working people” but what does that mean? Does she include those who have worked all their lives but are now retired? Those whose efforts and talents put them in the higher tax brackets? Entrepreneurs? Savers?

More likely she will deliver selective austerity, in which the private sector will be fleeced to ratchet up the pay and pensions of state employees.

The process has already begun with inflation-busting wage increases across the public sector which, incidentally, account for around half of the £22billion black hole supposedly left by the previous Tory government.

There will be a crackdown on welfare, fraud, and worklessness. The Government has said it will make special provisions in law for the most vulnerable.

The Trade Unions, far from being grateful, are ravenous for more. RMT chief Mick Lynch is demanding nothing less than “the complete organisation of the UK economy by trade unions”.

Mr Lynch wants to sweep away the Thatcher reforms and make it easier to shutdown workplaces and even entire industries if employers fail to meet demands on pay and conditions. Welcome back to the 1970s.

Other unions are coming in hard and fast. The Royal College of Nursing (RCN) said the recent 5.5 per cent pay award for nurses in England was not enough and must be improved.

By giving train drivers 15 per cent and junior doctors south of the Border 22 per cent, Ms Reeves has begun a wage spiral which could strangle any hope of economic growth.

Hardened by years of industrial trench warfare with the Tories, union barons are not about to bow down to a weak and inexperienced Labour government. On the contrary, they believe they can control it.

The constant talking down of the economy is having baleful effects. It is now hard fact that UK businesses are freezing both vital investment and the hiring of staff ahead of the Budget. There is an alarming collapse in business confidence.

Ms Reeves has said this would be “the most pro-business government we have ever seen”. But with the constant negativity and parlous state of the UK economy why would anyone invest in a country when its Chancellor has been saying for weeks that it is effectively a basket case?

This speech was an attempt to inject some positivity into the Labour narrative, but she will be judged by her deeds, not her words.

Standard
Britain, Economic, Government, Politics, Society

Starmer needs to recalibrate the mood

LABOUR PARTY

ELECTED to office less than three months ago, the Labour Party has begun its annual conference – this year in Liverpool – already weighed down by incumbency: rows over gifts from wealthy party donors and tickets to football games as well as rifts about Keir Starmer’s chief of staff’s pay are feeding into the public disquiet. These come amidst the burden of government in difficult economic circumstances. Coupled with the low public trust and the needless surplus of gloom, the political honeymoon period for Labour is well and truly over. We knew change was high up on the political agenda for Labour, but since day one of government it has set out with the explicit objective of dampening expectations of how soon change might come. The gloom is palpable.

There is a degree of urgency for Starmer to recalibrate the mood with a sense of optimism and purpose. He needs to give the country reasons to be glad of a Labour government in ways that go beyond relief at no longer being governed by Tory rule. New governments often come to power blaming the last for what it has inherited. The PM has given the nation an unvarnished account of the dismal legacy left for Labour; a bleak audit that covers a record of political and financial maladministration.

Conservative ministers, driven by ideological fanaticism and self-serving cynicism, squandered energy and vital resources on ill-conceived, unworkable policies. Public services were starved of the means by which they could effectively operate. With that in mind, it is easy to see that Sir Keir has a difficult job because the country is in a dire mess. Putting things right will take time. Nevertheless, that morose message has been bitterly soured by a performance of fiscal discipline, delivered without a hint of uplifting accompaniment.

The prime minister says things will get worse before they get better. His chancellor, Rachel Reeves, cites “black holes” in the budget, withdraws winter fuel payments for all but the poorest pensioners, and continually pledges that there is more pain to come. Ms Reeves’ argument is that government departments under the Conservatives overspent by £22bn in the budget and that deep cuts are needed to compensate. This is a self-imposed restriction that stems from ill-advised fiscal rules. The force of that constraint, and the zeal with which it is applied as austerity across Whitehall, is also a matter of political choice.

The government’s strategists argue that adherence to Tory spending limits was a “non-negotiable” condition of persuading the public that Labour could be trusted on the economy. Possibly, possibly not. There is no way to test the counterfactual scenario, where Ms Reeves could have fought the election with a wider range of tax-raising options still open. However, the decision to lean into unpopularity so hard, so fast, and without a countervailing narrative of hope looks like very poor strategic judgment.

Labour’s election manifesto contained plenty of reasons to expect a substantial departure from a grim status quo. A marked progressive shift was promised in the areas of workers’ rights, a robust commitment to net zero, improved relations with the rest of Europe and, perhaps most significantly, readiness to embrace a more interventionist model of economic management, including public ownership of utility companies.

The Starmerite script contains rather too much fiscal conservatism, but the hope on the left of the party is that there is a social democratic framework at its core. That would express the opposite of the Tory conviction that government’s main function is to facilitate market supremacy and then get out of the way. Many Labour MPs, activists, and Labour supporting people in the country will feel unsure which of the two strands – cringing continuity or bold departure – will dominate. Keir Starmer’s task is to answer in terms that give hope of meaningful change to come.

Standard
Britain, China, Government, Intelligence, Middle East, Russia, Society, United States

Spy chiefs give joint-interview at Festival

US-UK INTELLIGENCE

IN a rare public appearance, Richard Moore, the head of MI6, has warned that Russia’s intelligence services have become “feral” and “reckless” in the way they are plotting attacks in Britain and across Europe.

In an historic joint interview with the head of the CIA, Mr Moore said Moscow is now using criminal gangs for state-sponsored terror attacks in Europe. The attacks are “more amateurish” and are endangering more lives.

His CIA counterpart William Burns said coordinated operations between UK and US intelligence services are thwarting the plots across the Continent and in mainland Britain. The intelligence chiefs were appearing before a Festival in north London, where they spoke of the long-standing relationship between MI6 and the CIA.

Mr Burns also revealed how the CIA feared Vladimir Putin was going to deploy tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine in the autumn of 2022, after falsely accusing Volodymyr Zelensky of amassing nuclear materials for such an attack against his troops.

The CIA chief also said 90 per cent of a new peace deal between Israel and Hamas is complete, adding that its details may be published in the “next few days”.

Mr Moore, known as C by his officers, spoke about how the two services often conduct intelligence operations together. “We will sometimes decide who is better-placed to go first – we call it the best athlete model. Whoever is best placed to do it, we work in a non-competitive way to get the result,” he said.

The MI6 boss said Russia’s intelligence services have conducted sabotage and criminal acts in Britain and in Europe, becoming “a lot more feral”. He added: “The fact they are using a criminal element shows they are becoming a bit desperate – they can’t use their own people. They’re happy to use criminals. It’s just a bit more reckless.”

Mr Moore referred to an arson attack in Leyton, east London, on a Ukraine-linked business, which is suspected of being directed by Moscow. Two men have since been charged for helping Russian intelligence after the Metropolitan Police used terrorism powers to investigate.

He also said the Salisbury poisoning in 2018 was “emblematic” of the recklessness of Russian agents.

“They left a large phial of a deadly poison lying around to be picked up,” he said. “It could have killed an entire school – in fact, it killed an innocent British civilian.”

Two Russian agents daubed Novichok nerve agent on the doorknob of former Russian spy Sergei Skripal, which nearly killed him and his daughter. But the perfume bottle with the poison in it was later picked up by a woman, who later died.

Speaking publicly for the first time about how the CIA feared Russia was close to using a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine months into the conflict, Mr Burns said: “There was a moment in the fall of 2022 that I think there was a genuine risk of potential use of tactical nuclear weapons. I felt we should not be intimidated by Putin.”

He was dispatched to the Turkish capital Ankara to tell the head of the FSB, Sergei Naryshkin, how the West would respond “militarily” if Russia used nuclear weapons in Ukraine. The CIA chief said: “We cannot afford to be intimidated by that sabre-rattling and bullying. The record shows the United States has provided enormous support to Ukraine, and I’m sure we’ll continue to.”

Mr Burns has been intimately involved in the difficult negotiations in the Middle East between Hamas and Israel, with Qatar and Egypt acting as intermediaries.

He said 90 per cent of a peace deal is complete, adding: “The last 10 per cent is the last 10 per cent for a reason… it’s the hardest part to do. But we will make this more detailed proposal, I hope in the next several days, then we’ll see.”

And he warned that Hamas cannot be entirely defeated. “You can severely degrade their military capabilities, but it is a movement and an idea, and the way you kill an idea is with a better idea.”

The intelligence chiefs – who gave a public interview to the editor of the Financial Times on the grounds of Kenwood House in Hampstead – said China was their main preoccupation, with 20 per cent of the CIA’s resources being devoted to the Beijing regime.

Standard