Early evening summary
Keir Starmer has claimed that the economy is beginning to revive. (See 10.15am.)
Lord Frost, the former Brexit minister, has rejected the Conservative party’s claim that joining the PEM customs scheme would be a betrayal of Brexit. (See 3.59pm.)
The UK population exceeded that of France for the first time on record, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). As Jamie Grierson reports, the UK population is projected to reach 72.5 million by mid-2032, up nearly 5 million from 67.6 million in mid-2022, according to figures from the ONS.
Suella Braverman, the former Tory home secretary, has suggested it is not impossible that Britain could become an Iran-style enemy of America, led by an Islamist government, within the next 20 years. (See 4.47pm.)
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, has criticised Scottish Labour for not supporting his backbench bill to compensate Waspi women. (See 5.22pm.) Flynn said:
After today’s vote, it’s clear that Anas Sarwar and Labour MPs have broken their promises to Waspi women and shown they are incapable of standing up for Scotland.
Ahead of the UK election, Anas Sarwar promised he would stand up to Keir Starmer but instead he has proven to be spineless in his silence - rolling over and rubber-stamping every damaging decision from Downing Street, no matter the consequences for Scotland.
US will take 'big interest' in Sudan because of Jihadist threat, Lammy tells MPs
The US will take a “big interest” in the war in Sudan, because “failed countries become a haven of Jihadist extremist activity”, David Lammy has said.
As PA Media reports, the foreign secretary confirmed he had had “a brief conversation” with incoming US secretary of state Marco Rubio about the conflict in the region.
Sudan plunged into conflict in mid-April 2023, when long-simmering tensions between its military and paramilitary leaders broke out in the capital, Khartoum, and spread to other regions, including the vast western Darfur region, PA says. The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has said there are grounds to believe both government forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Force (RSF) may be committing war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide in Darfur.
During a statement, asked by the Lib Dem MP Olly Glover if he could ensure Sudan was a priority for the US, Lammy replied:
I listened to the secretary of state, Rubio’s first press conference, and he talked about wanting prosperity for the United States, wanting, of course, security for the United States, and wanting safety for the United States.
And the truth is, the tremendous problems that we’re seeing in the Horn of Africa, the Sahel and Sudan, are deeply worrying, not just for us here in Europe, but also for the United States, because failed countries become a haven of Jihadist extremist activity that washes back up on our shores, that is the truth of it.
And when big countries, or indeed more powerful countries, invade small countries, particularly countries with minimal resources, we should be very concerned indeed and raise it as a big issue.
So for all of those reasons, I expect the United States will take a big interest in what’s happening in this regard.
Lammy earlier stated that the conflict in Sudan has created “the world’s largest humanitarian crisis”, with 30 million people now in “urgent need”. He said:
Just to make it clear to the house that’s more than Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Gaza and Mali combined. That is how bad the situation currently is.
Lammy also said the UK had an interest in the crisi. “Irregular migration from Sudan to Britain alone increased by 16% last year,” he said.
Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, is flying to India in February for talks on a trade deal. He told an India Global Forum in parliament today:
I want to reaffirm the UK’s commitment to deliver growth in both countries, through the trade deal ... I can let you know exclusively, I hear what you say about urgency, I’ve just been finalising my own visit to India next month to make sure we proceed.
MPs back SNP bill to compensate Waspi women 105 votes to 0 - but lack of time means it will go no further
MPs have voted to back an SNP bill saying compensation should be paid to the Waspi (Women Against State Pension Inequality) – although the government and the Conservative party abstained, and the bill will not proceed any further and will not become law.
Stephen Flynn, the SNP leader at Westminster, engineered the vote using the 10-minute rule, which allows a backbencher to make a short speech in favour of a private member’s bill that will not be allocated further time.
The 10-minute rule motion was passed by 105 votes to zero. The motion was backed by 61 Lib Dem MPs, 10 Labour MPs, 9 independent MPs, 7 SNP MPs, 5 DUP MPs, 3 Green MPs, 3 Reform UK MPs, 3 Plaid Cymru MPs, 2 Conservative MPs, 1 UUP MP and 1 TUV MP.
Waspi women have been campaigning for compensation to cover the fact that they were not properly informed about the government’s plan to raise the state pension age for women. In March last year the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman said the women should receive compensation worth up to £10.5bn. But the then Tory government did not accept the proposal, and last month the new Labour government said it would not pay the compensation either.
Flynn’s bill would require the government to draw up plans for a compensation scheme.
The 10 Labour MPs who voted for it were: Jonathan Brash, Julia Buckley, Neil Duncan-Jordan, Chris Hinchliff, Terry Jermy, Brian Leishman, Emma Lewell-Buck, Melanie Onn,, Jon Trickett, and Steve Witherden.
The two Tories backing the motion were Roger Gale and John Hayes.
Braverman suggests it is not impossible UK could be Iran-style enemy of US, led by Islamist government, in next 20 years
Suella Braverman, the former Tory home secretary, has suggested it is not impossible that Britain could become an Iran-style enemy of America, led by an Islamist government, within the next 20 years.
She raised the suggestion in a speech today to the rightwing Heritage Foundation in Washington, reviving a suggestion originally made by JD Vance before he was picked by Donald Trump to be vice president.
Braverman, who is one of the most rightwing figures in the Conservative party and who is seen as a potential defector to Reform UK, devoted much of the speech to praising Trump, saying that his re-election could lead to the demise of “progressive thinking” in the west.
She went on:
More importantly, what will happen in the west, if it does not? What will happen if democracy is indeed thwarted by the existing political class?
Vice President JD Vance said, at the National Conservative conference at which I also spoke in the summer, that the UK was going to be the first Islamist nation with nuclear weapons. I don’t think he was joking.
Is it an impossibility that 20 years from now, it will be the UK, not China or Russia, that will emerge as the greatest strategic threat to the USA? Born out of a broken relationship and weak leadership. What happens if the UK falls into the hands of Muslim fundamentalism, our legal system gets substituted by Sharia Law and our nuclear capabilities vest in a regime not to dissimilar to that of Iran today?
Regardless of whether one thinks this is a realistic outcome, which I do not, should we not have the courage to ask these questions?
Braverman indulged in further anti-Muslim scaremongering in the Q&A. Referring to Axel Rudakubana, the Southport killer, she falsely described him as an “Islamist extremist”.
She justified this by saying that he had looked at Islamist material online. But Rudakubana came from a Christian family, and although he had looked at Islamist material online, he had also looked at lots of other extremely violent material online that did not have an Islamist connection. Sentencing Rudakubana last week, the judge, Mr Justice Goose, said:
The prosecution have made it clear that these proceedings were not acts of terrorism within the meaning of the terrorism legislation, because there is no evidence that Rudakubana’s purpose was to advance a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
Updated
Gazans have a “right of return”, Anneliese Dodds, the development minister, has told MPs.
Speaking in the Commons during a statement on the Middle East, Dodds was asked about President Trump’s suggestion that Palestinians should be forced to leave Gaza.
Dodds said:
On the question that he raised around whether Gazans are to be able to return: of course, they must be able to return. They must be allowed to return. That is very clear under international humanitarian law.
Toby Young has taken his seat for life in the House of Lords, PA Media reports. PA says:
The 61-year-old, who is founder and director of the Free Speech Union (FSU), an associate editor of The Spectator and editor-in-chief of The Daily Sceptic, was handed a peerage by Tory leader Kemi Badenoch.
Lord Young of Acton, whose late father was a Labour peer, wore the traditional scarlet robes for the short introduction ceremony, where he swore allegiance to the King.
He was supported by non-affiliated peer Lady Fox of Buckley, the director of the Academy of Ideas think tank and a former Brexit Party MEP, and Conservative peer Lord Moynihan of Chelsea.
Both sit on the advisory board of the FSU, according to the register of members’ interests.
Former Brexit minister Lord Frost rejects Tory claim that joining PEM customs scheme would undermine Brexit
Last week, when Maroš Šefčovič, the European Commission vice president, floated the prospect of the UK joining the Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Convention (PEM), a Europe-wide customs scheme, Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, denounced this idea as a “betrayal” that would “shackle us to the EU”.
But this means that the Conservative leadership is now taking an even more hardline approach than some of the most prominent Brexiters in the party.
In an interview in the Times today, Lord Frost, the former Brexit minister who negotiated the post-Brexit trade deal with the EU, said that joining PEM would not threaten any of Britain’s Brexit freedoms. He said, when he was in government, he considered the case for joining. He explained:
We didn’t see it as raising any issue of principle, but we equally didn’t consider it to be particularly in UK interests. The EU also seemed to lose interest rapidly so the negotiations on this point quickly ran out of steam.
And Daniel Hannan, the peer and former MEP who was one of the leading Tory pro-Brexit campaigners in 2016, has also indicated that he would not mind the UK joining PEM. In his column in the Sunday Telegraph this weekend, referring to the response to the Šefčovič proposal, Hannan said:
Immediately, Conservatives were denouncing “membership through the back door” while Lib Dems were exulting in Brussels being “receptive to the UK joining the Customs Union”. But the PEM is not a customs union (something which, for the avoidance of doubt, the UK, as a global trading nation, should not join). Are we really going to oppose, on principle and without looking at it, anything containing the word “Euro”?
This article by Jennifer Rankin explains how PEM works.
Parents have 'lost trust' in special educational needs provision, MPs told
Parents have “lost trust” in special educational needs provision for children in England because of the hurdles they face getting help from local authorities, MPs were told.
A joint session of three parliamentary select committees - education, health and social care, and housing and local government - heard evidence from charities and organisations on the crisis facing children with special needs and disabilities in England.
With the number of children and young people granted education, health and care plans (EHCPs) heading towards 600,000, and local authorities reporting rising high needs budget deficits, the experts said resources were being strained to breaking point.
Imogen Steele, policy and public affairs officer for Contact, said her organisation was overwhelmed by calls to its helpline, and was trying to help parents rebuild their trust in what has becomeaninaccessible system.
A lot of parents don’t have trust in the system because they have been trying to get in touch with local authorities and they don’t reply, so they feel lost in the system.
Amanda Allard, director of the Council for Disabled Children, said:
What happens at the moment is that we have a ‘many wrong doors’ policy in too many areas, as opposed to one front door. And that is because of the different agencies involved and the different things that they commission, and the arguments - quite frankly - that happen over who pays for what.
Asked about improving the current distribution of high needs funding, Allard said:
I think that is a really, really difficult question…. what I would say is that the money couldn’t be spent any more badly than it is currently being spent.
Later witnesses were asked about the link between pupils with special needs and permanent exclusions. Tania Tirraoro, co-director of the Special Needs Jungle support group, said it was often only after pupils had been excluded from their school that they were found to have special needs. Tirraoro said:
We think that this should be banned - we don’t think a school should be allowed to exclude a child until an assessment of need has been carried out.
Government will not be able to meet climate commitments if Heathrow expansion goes ahead, Lib Dems claim
Paul Kohler, MP for Wimbledon and the Lib Dem transport spokesperson, told the Commons that Heathrow expansion would make it impossible for the UK to meet its climate commitments. He told MPs:
Whilst we must grow the economy, we must not do so at the expense of the environment. Expanding Heathrow, Gatwick and Luton airports will drive, fly, even, a coach and horses through our climate commitments, adding 92 million tonnes of carbon dioxide to our carbon footprint by 2050.
Why has [Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary], the former London deputy mayor for transport, now changed her mind? Two, how can the government reconcile this massive growth in carbon emissions with our carbon commitments? And three, why if the government is looking to grow our economy isn’t the government engaging meaningfully with Europe by negotiating a customs union?
Ministers are normally relatively respectful when responding to Liberal Democrat spokespeople in the Commons (they tend to make a point of taking them seriously, in part to make the Tories look more lightweight). But Mike Kane, the transport minister, was withering about Kohler. He replied:
One foot in, one foot out, you know, sort of ‘shake it all about’. Say one thing to one community under a flight path, saying another thing about jobs to another community on the flight paths.
Whatever I say will end up on [Lib Dem Focus leaflets], but you can’t have it both ways – you can’t support growth, you can’t support jobs, you can’t support airspace modernisation, you can’t support sustainable aviation fuels and then go to your constituents and say, ‘well look at what this terrible government is doing’.
John McDonnell says up to 10,000 people will have to be rehoused if Heathrow third runway goes ahead
MPs representing constituencies in west London expressed reservations about the Heathrow third runway plan during the urgent question.
John McDonnell, the former shadow chancellor whose Hayes and Harlington constituency includes Heathrow, is a strong opponent of the third runway and he asked:
Has the department provided … an assessment for example of where the 8-10,000 people in my constituency who have their homes demolished or rendered unliveable will live if the Heathrow expansion goes ahead?
Has [the minister] also mapped out for the chancellor the flight paths of the additional quarter of a million planes flying over the homes of people in those marginal seats of Uxbridge and Watford and Harrow and elsewhere?
And also has he advised the chancellor on some of the figures that have been bandied about about the economic benefits which seem to derive from the Airport Commission’s figures that are out of date – that his own department rubbished very thoroughly only in recent years.
Rupa Huq, the Labour MP for Ealing Central and Acton, said some of her constituents would want “a better not a bigger Heathrow”.
And Deirdre Costigan, the Labour MP for Ealing Southall, said while some of her constituents would “welcome the good-quality, well-paid jobs airport expansion will bring” but others would have environmental concerns.
Tories suggest government not serious about Heathrow third runway, and that it's just panic measure from Reeves
Gareth Bacon, the shadow transport secretary, told MPs that his party supported a third runway at Heathrow – but he suggested that Labour was not serious about the proposal.
Speaking during the urgent question, he said:
We have heard that the chancellor is about to announce her support for airport expansion at Luton, Gatwick and Heathrow. His Majesty’s opposition are supportive of airport expansion because we recognise the huge economic benefits that that would bring.
In the case of Luton and Gatwick, the planning processes are well under way, but the situation at Heathrow is rather different. A completed third runway at Heathrow would undoubtedly bring economic benefits, which we would support, but delivering it will not be straightforward because there are major logistical barriers to its construction.
After asking for an assurance that a new planning application for a third runway would be submitted, he went on:
I sincerely hope that the minister can answer these questions today because if not, it will be clear that this is not a serious policy, but rather a panicked and rushed attempt by the chancellor of the exchequer to distract attention from the state of the economy, which is currently withering under this floundering Labour government.
Mike Kane, the transport minister, said Bacon was showing “brass neck” in criticising Labour on the economy given his party’s record.
Updated
Allowing Heathrow expansion would be 'vastly irresponsible in midst of climate breakdown', Greens' Siân Berry tells MPs
Allowing Heathrow expansion would be “vastly irrresponsible in the midst of approaching climate breakdown”, the Green MP Siân Berry told MPs.
In a Commons urgent question on the proposal to approve a third runway at Heathrow, she said that if this were to happen, the government would be “literally flying in the face of climate change”.
Does the [minister] understand that expanding London’s airports and building a third runway at Heathrow will be vastly irresponsible in the midst of approaching climate breakdown, literally flying in the face of the Climate Change Committee’s advice?
How can ministers even be considering this when 2024 was the year we went over 1.5C degrees warming, the limit we’re committed to not breaking in the Paris Climate Agreement?
How can ministers see catastrophic wildfires in California, deadly floods in Spain last year and devastating floods this year in the UK and still pursue a wrong policy?
And Berry asked why the government was floating plans for airport expansion when the Climate Change Committee is due to provide new advice for government. She cited a report by the New Economics Foundation that says airport expansion could undo all the gains from the government’s clean power plan.
Mike Kane, the transport minister, was responding to Berry. In his opening remarks he prompted laughter when he claimed that the stories about Heathrow expansion that prompted the UQ were purely speculative.
He also said that, when applications for airport expansion were considered, there were trade-offs.
There is always a trade-off to be had, if applications do come forward, between noise, carbon and growing our economy.
But he then talked up the case for expansion.
We recognise that Heathrow has operated at over 95% capacity for most of the past two decades, which has presented limited opportunities for growth in route networks and passenger numbers.
We live in an interconnected world where people want to visit their family members and do business across our planet, and we have moved faster in this government in the first 6 months than the last government did in 14 years.
He said the government was “cleaning up” the transport sector, and he urged Berry to support that.
He also claimed, in his opening remarks, that the aviation sector in the UK was world class, and that the government was committed to supporting it.
We have been clear that any airport expansion proposals would need to demonstrate that they contribute to economic growth, are compatible with the UK’s legally binding climate change commitments and meet strict environmental standards of air quality and noise pollution.
There is currently no live development consent order application for a third runway at Heathrow airport, and it is for a scheme promoter to decide on how it takes forward any development consent order application for that runway.
The government would carefully consider any consent order application for the third runway at Heathrow in line with relevant planning processes.
Updated
Jarvis implied there will be a leak inquiry into how Policy Exchange got hold of its document.
In response to a question from Labour’s Oliver Ryan, who condemned this “disgraceful politically motivated leak to a former Tory adviser”, Jarvis said:
It is standard procedure in circumstances such as this that the cabinet secretary will order a leak inquiry. That will be the right way to proceed under these circumstances.
Bernard Jenkin (Con) suggested that the leaked Home Office document showed “there’s a large body of opinion that has completely lost its way in terms of how we deal with extremism and terrorist threats”. He went on:
Could I urge [the minister] to encourage the department to return to what Prevent is really intended to achieve and not get distracted by all this political correctness given that most of the country have no idea what a ‘non-hate crime incident’ is? We need to return to proper language that people understand or indeed the government itself is driving the disillusion and despair that people have about these matters.
Jarvis said the Jenkin should accept that Yvette Cooper and her ministers were serious about dealing with the threat. He went on:
We will leave no stone unturned to ensure that we have the appropriate level of resource in the right place, at the right time to ensure that the ever-evolving and complex nature of the threat that we face both in the United Kingdom but also abroad as well is appropriately addressed by our law enforcement agencies.
Lee Anderson (Reform UK) told Jarvis that, if he could not see that there was two-tier policing in the UK, he needed to get out more.
Jarvis said that, if Anderson were to go out with his local police force, he would understand much better the work they do.
Jarvis says two-tier accusation does police 'no favours whatsover', and rejects comparison with Lord Scarman
James Cleverly, the Tory former home secretary, said that when Margaret Thatcher was prime minister, Lord Scarman produced a report after the Brixton riots. Although Scarman did not use the phrase, he identified a problem with two-tier policing, with black communies being treated unfairly. The police responded, Cleverly said. He asked why it was now regarded as far right to complain about two-tier policing?
Jarvis said that he knew Cleverly respected the police, and understood they did a difficult job. People who were spreading a narrative about two-tier policing were doing the police “no favours whatsoever”, he said. They were making the job of the police more difficult, he added.
In response to a question from Chris Murray (Lab), Jarvis said the Home Office has already announced plans to toughen up the law on buying knives online. He said:
Under these new rules, a two-step system will be mandated for all retailers selling knives online, requiring customers to submit photo ID point of sale, and again, on delivery. Delivery companies will only be able to deliver a bladed article to the person who purchased it.
And it will also be illegal to leave a package containing a bladed weapon on a doorstep when no one is going to receive it.
Jarvis accuses last Tory government of using extremism issues as 'political football'
Jarvis claimed that previous governments used these issues as “a political football”. It was motivated by the desire to score political points. “That will never be the approach of this government,” he said.
I have to say that it is the case that previous governments sought to use these particular issues as a political football. It is the case that previous governments were on occasion motivated as much by a desire to score political points, and that will never be the approach of this government. We’re only motivated by a desire to protect the public.
Updated
Jarvis told MPs that there were different versions of the Home Office report leaked to Policy Exchange. It was not clear which version the thinktank obtained, he said.
Jarvis dismisses Tory suggestion Home Office prioritises 'policing manosphere' over combating Islamist terrorism
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said the leak of the report did propose an extension of the definition of extremism. He asked a series of questions.
He asked if the government agreed with the recommendation of William Shawcross’s review of the Prevent programme. Shawcross said Prevent should focus on extremist ideology.
94% of terrorism caused deaths since 1999 were caused by Islamist terrorism. Does [the minister] agree that combating Islamist terrorism is more important than policing the manosphere?
Philp said problems like violence against women and girls, and an obsession with violence generally, were best dealt with by the police.
He asked if the government would continue with the policy of the last Tory government, telling the police to focus less on non-crime hate incidents.
Police should not be looking into matters or recording personal data where there is no imminent risk of criminality. To do so would waste police time and infringe freedom of speech. Any move away from this will enable the thought police to stop anyone telling uncomfortable truths that leftwing lawyers don’t like.
Philp also said the internal report said that people campaigning against rape gangs, or commenting on two-tier policing, were far right. He went on:
That is nonsense. Campaigning against rape gangs is not extremist or far right, and commenting on policing, whether you agree or not with the comments, is simply the exercise of free speech. So will the minister categorically disown those remarks which were contained in the home secretary’s report?
In response, Dan Jarvis, the security minister, said that the government has recommended all but one of the Shawcross recommendations.
And, on non-crime hate incidents, he said the government had been clear that the police should focus on making the streets safer.
He did not address Philp’s final point.
Updated
Security minister Dan Jarvis says Home Office does not have plans to expand defintion of extremism
Dan Jarvis, the security minister, is responding to a Tory urgent question about the Policy Exchange report about a leaked, internal Home Office document about extremism.
He says many documents are published across government that are not government policy.
He says the document did not recommend an expansion in the definition extremism, and he says “there are not and have never been any plans to do so”.
But he says there has been a “troubling rise” in the number of cases of teenagers drawn into extremism, and the home secretary has set out plans to deal with that.
Updated
Rise in UK population forecast by ONS would boost GDP by 0.3%, and cut borrowing by £5bn, thinktank says
At the Downing Street lobby briefing this morning, asked about the ONS’s projected population increase figures (see 10.38am), the PM’s spokesperson said Keir Starmer was committed to reducing net migration, which he said was “staggeringly high”. This discussion came after an earlier discussion about the government’s commitment to increase growth.
But the Resolution Foundation thinktank says, if the government wants growth, it should welcome the projected population increase, driven by net migration. It says:
New ONS population projections should, if incorporated by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), improve the economic and fiscal outlook, and reduce borrowing by around £5 billion …
The new projections have revised up expectations of the working-age population in 2029-30 by around 400,000. Based on previous scenarios from the OBR, the foundation estimates that such an upward revision to the working-age population would boost forecast GDP by around 0.3 per cent – or £12 billion a year. This in turn should reduce forecast borrowing by around £5bn a year – all else equal. This would be welcome news for the Treasury ahead of the spring forecast given rising debt interest costs in the opposite direction …
A bigger population would ordinarily mean higher demand for public services. However, the foundation notes that with the projected number of children – who are large consumers of public services – revised down by 160,000 in 2029-30, the new population projections may not increase the pressure on public services.
Finally, the foundation says the revised projections are likely to have wider impacts on the UK’s economic record – likely slightly weakening its already dire performance on productivity and per person income growth. The OBR will weigh up whether it agrees with the ONS projections, and the various impacts of a larger population, when it updates its economic and fiscal outlook on 26 March.
And Adam Corlett, principal economist at the thinktank, said:
Britain is forecast to have a slightly bigger population by the end of the decade than previously thought. While the projected number of children in Britain has been revised down by 160,000, this has been more than offset by working-age population forecasts rising by around 400,000, driven by higher net migration.
A larger working-age population means a bigger economy, more workers, and higher tax receipts, which should deliver a fiscal boost of around £5bn a year by the end of the decade. If the OBR uses these population projections, this will be welcome news for the Chancellor given the wider economic pressures she is facing.
Government appoints 32 mostly Labour MPs and peers as trade envoys, calling them 'global growth team'
The government has appointed 32 MPs and peers, from various parties by mostly Labour, to serve as trade envoys. Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, describes them as a “global growth team” and says they will “use their experience, expertise and knowledge to unlock new markets around the world for British businesses, drumming up investment into the UK and ultimately driving economic growth”.
The full list is here.
Investment in UK may be 10% lower than expected as result of Brexit, report says
Friday will mark the fifth anniversary of the day the UK left the EU. The Daily Express is running articles all week to mark the occasion, but elsewhere it is hard to find anyone minded to celebrate. At GB News they seem a bit concerned that Keir Starmer is not planning anything special. This chart, from the Economist, with polling showing that Britons now regard leaving as a mistake by a margin of almost two to one, explains the silence.
But UK in a Changing Europe (UKICE), one of the lead thinktanks on Brexit policy, has lined up something special. It has published a 142-page report with a series of short, clear essays explaining the impact of Brexit in numberous areas. One of the most interesting, by Stephen Hunsaker, covers investment. Hunsaker, a UKICE researcher, says that leaving the EU, and losing investment from the European Investment Bank, may have cut investment by 10%. He explains:
The UK has long faced challenges with low investment levels, affecting both business and public infrastructure. While these issues predate Brexit, the economic uncertainty stemming from the UK’s decision to leave the EU has deepened the country’s investment struggles. One of the most significant consequences of Brexit was the loss of funding from the European Investment Bank (EIB), which historically played a critical role in financing major UK infrastructure projects. Despite efforts to replace this funding with new domestic investment banks, the gap remains substantial, posing significant challenges to Labour’s plan for future growth.
There is a consensus that low levels of investment, both private and public, have held back productivity growth. The relatively low level of business investment in the UK pre-dated Brexit, but both aggregate data and survey evidence strongly suggest that Brexit is at least partly responsible for the particularly poor performance since 2016.
Investment may have been 10% lower than expected, potentially reducing productivity and GDP by over 1%. Some argued that this was driven primarily by Brexit uncertainty – and so would improve once the Brexit deal was implemented – but there is little evidence of this to date. The UK has continued to underperform the rest of the G7 on investment. Additionally, the UK saw rapid growth in business investment from 2010 to 2016 but as of Q2 2024, business investment remains at the same level as in Q2 2016.
There will be an urgent question in the Commons at 12.30pm on the Policy Exchange report about the leaked Home Office paper on extremism policy. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, has tabled the question.
After that there will be another UQ, tabled by the Green MP Siân Berry, about Heathrow expansion. A transport minister will respond.
After that, at around 2pm, there will be two Foreign Office statements: Anneliese Dodds, the develoment minister, on Gaza, and then David Lammy, the foreign secretary, on Sudan and the Eastern DRC.
SNP welcomes report saying migration will boost Scotland's population, as Tories claim 5m increase for UK 'shocking'
The Conservative party says the prospect of the UK population increasing by five million over the next decade, as the ONS expects (see 10.38am), is shocking.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said:
This projection is shocking and unacceptable. It can and must be stopped from materialising.
Ten million arrivals over ten years is far too high. We need a binding legal cap on visas issued each year which is very, very substantially lower than this in order to get the numbers down and under control.
But Kaukab Stewart, equalities minister in the SNP Scottish government, welcomed the forecast that immigrants will continue to want to settle in the country. She said:
These projections suggest that Scotland will continue to be an attractive country for people to live, work, study and settle in. We welcome people from around the world and other parts of the UK who want to build their lives here.
While our population is projected to continue aging, all projected growth will come from inward migration. This shows just how crucial migrants are to ensuring Scotland has a greater proportion of people of working age to fill skills gaps, sustain public services, contribute to communities, and grow the economy.
To enable us to address our demographic challenges, migration policies must be tailored to Scotland’s distinct needs. We will continue to press the UK government on introducing a Scottish graduate visa to help us retain capable people from around the world, and to work with us on a rural visa pilot tailored to the needs of our rural and island communities.
Updated
Starmer restates call for new approach to dealing with 'cohort of loners who are extreme'
Keir Starmer has restated his belief that the authorities need to find a new way of dealing with “a cohort of loners who are extreme” but who might not fit the conventional definition of terrorism.
In an interview with ITV, asked why the government has decided to reject a recommendation from an internal Home Office report saying the definition of extremism should be broadened, even though Starmer seemed to be saying the opposite last week (see 9.26am), Starmer replied:
When it comes to extremism, it’s very important that we are focused on the threat so we can deploy our resource properly, and therefore we’re looking carefully at where the key challenges are.
Obviously, that’s now informed in what I said last week in the aftermath of the Southport murders, where we’ve got the additional challenge of a cohort of loners who are extreme, and they need to be factored in. So that’s the focus.
'We've got the additional challenge, I think, of a sort of cohort of loners who are extreme and they need to be factored in'
— ITVPolitics (@ITVNewsPolitics) January 28, 2025
Starmer responds to Home Office plans to reject internal advice around widening the definition of extremism to cover the far left and environmentalists pic.twitter.com/v0TPTJiIQH
UK population expected to increase by 5m over next decade due to net migration, ONS says
The UK population could grow by almost five million over the next decade to reach 72.5 million by mid-2032 because of net migration, figures suggest. PA Media reports:
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) projects the rise from 67.6 million in mid-2022 will be driven almost entirely by net migration, with the difference between the number of people arriving and leaving the country estimated to total 4.9 million over the 10-year period.
This is compared to the natural change in population – the difference between births and deaths – projected to be “around zero”.
The data, published this morning, assumes the level of net migration will average 340,000 a year from mid-2028 onwards, lower than current levels.
The number of births compared to the number of deaths across the period is estimated to be almost identical – 6.8 million.
While births are projected to increase slightly, deaths are also projected to rise due to the relatively large number of people reaching older ages who were born during the so-called baby boom in the wake of the Second World War.
The estimates mean the overall UK population is projected to rise by 7.3% between mid-2022 and mid-2032, compared with an increase of 6.1% over the previous 10 years.
Commening on the figures, James Robards, from the ONS, said:
The UK population is projected to grow by almost five million over the next decade. The driver of this growth is migration, with natural change – the difference between births and deaths – projected to be around zero.
Our latest projections also highlight an increasingly ageing population, with the number of people aged over 85 projected to nearly double to 3.3 million by 2047. This is in part because of the ageing of the baby boom generation, as well as general increases in life expectancy.
And these are from the ONS report.
Starmer says he wants 'even better' trading relationship with US
In his Bloomberg interview Keir Starmer also said that he wanted an “even better” trading relationship with the US.
We’ve got a huge amount of trade between our two countries already and the base is there for even better trading relations. We need to build on that.
Starmer says Labour must get economy working and 'we're beginning to see how that's turning around'
Keir Starmer has claimed that the economy is beginning to revive.
Growth has been largely flat since Labour took office, but in an interview with Bloomberg this morning he claimed that it was starting to revive.
We have to get our economy working. I think we’re beginning to see how that’s turning around.
The number one priority of this Labour government is growth: growth, growth, growth.
Starmer spoke to Bloomberg after his meeting this morning with business leaders, ahead of Rachel Reeves’ speech tomorrow on promoting growth. According to Bloomberg’s Alex Wickham, “hose in attendance at the breakfast meeting included Lloyds Banking Group CEO Charlie Nunn, Nationwide Building Society CEO Debbie Crosbie, BAE Systems CEO Charles Woodburn and Tesco chief Ken Murphy. Other companies represented included Sage Group, Taylor Wimpey, BT, Unilever and Vodafone Group.”
Starmer told the meeting that growth was the government’s number one mission and that ministers were “hardwiring growth into all the decisions of the cabinet”.
Whitty says terminally ill patients should not be considered as lacking capacity just due to 'low mood'
Q: Are doctors able to recognise depression? And can they decide if that affects someone’s capacity to make a decision about their health?
Whitty says doctors can identify depression. But he says it is harder for them to assess if that is affecting capacity.
That’s where help from colleagues from psychiatry, mental health more widely, is going to be useful. But that should be good medical practice, in my view, under all circumstances.
But Whitty also says people should not be judged not to have capacity just because of “low mood”.
Certainly what I wouldn’t want is to be in a situation where the existence of the fact that someone who has a terminal diagnosis has some degree of low mood in itself just rules them out from any kind of medical intervention, this or any other. That shouldn’t be the case.
Q: Are you happy with the provision in the act that assisted dying should be available to someone with only six months to live?
Whitty says he would be happy with that, provided that six months is seen as a “central view. He says it is generally easy to say that someone might die in the foreseeable future, but “whether it’s five months or whether it’s seven months is a lot harder”.
He says it should be accepted that, although the bill would apply to someone with six months left to live, that must be seen as an estimate, not a precise prediction.
Whitty says bill should not include deadline for when NHS would start delivering assisted dying
Whitty says he thinks the best safeguards are simple safeguards. “Over complicating actually usually makes the safeguard less certain, to be honest,” he says.
Rebecca Paul (Con) asks how long the NHS should be given to prepare for the act coming into force.
Whitty says there is a difference between the act technically coming into force, and assisted dying services actually being provided.
On the latter, he says he would be opposed to the bill including a deadline saying when services have to start being delivered. But there should be “a reasonable expectation that the NHS and others should be involved in trying to make plans for this as fast as possible”.
Whitty says, for “the majority of people”, it is very clear whether or not they have capacity to make a decision about their health.
He says having a mental health condition does not, by itself, means someone lacks capacity.
Whitty says he is glad the assisted dying bill would work alongside the Mental Capacity Act. He says doctors understand the act very well, and if doctors are applying the act to decide if a patient has capacity to make decisions about their health, they will come to the same conclusion. It is “well established” legislation, he says.
Whitty says it would be difficult to include in assisted dying bill list of illnesses that can be terminal
Sarah Olney (Lib Dem) says the bill does not give a list of illnesses which could be terminal. Would it be possible to produce such a list?
Whitty says he thinks this would be difficult.
He says a patient may have cancer, but that on its own might not mean they would be certain to die.
So the fact they have cancer is not in itself, a demonstration that they are going to die, and in fact, majority will not. Almost 80% of people with breast cancer diagnosed tomorrow will still be alive 10 years later, for example.
Equally, there are people who may not have a single disease that is going to lead to the path to death, but they have multiple diseases that are interacting in the same person. They’re highly frail, and it is not the fact of one disease that’s the cause, but the fact of this constellation that is clearly leading them on a path inexorably to a death at some point in the foreseeable future.
Therefore, I think it’s quite difficult to actually specify these diseases are going to cause death and these diseases are not, because in both directions that could potentially be misleading.
Whitty says doctors sometimes have to give advice to people ahead of an operation, including that the procedure could lead to them dying. He says this to make the point that giving advice that covers end of life would not be unprecedented for doctors.
Q: What sort of training would doctors need if this bill becomes law?
Whitty says there are two types: training which is normal for doctors, and specific training related to this bill.
He says doctors are routinely taught about capacity. But that training might need adaption if the bill becomes law.
But there might also be a need for specific training, relating to how drugs are given to people to allow them to end someone’s life.
Prof Sir Chris Whitty is giving evidence to the public bill committee now.
He starts by saying that he is neutral on the bill. He says that he and other chief medical officers regard assisted dying as a societal question, and that it is for parliament to decide if it should be allowed, not them.
But he says he is there to answer technical questions.
Prof Sir Chris Whitty to speak to MPs about assisted dying bill
Good morning. The main political event of the week will be Rachel Reeves’ speech tomorrow on promoting growth, and this morning she and Keir Starmer have been meeting business leaders over breakfast in the centre of London to discuss what it will say. It is not clear yet how impressed the audience were, but the pictures look good.
A week ago Starmer was giving a speech in Downing Street on his response to the Southport killings, and one of his arguments was that the authorities need a wider definition of terrorism to include people like the Southport killer, Axel Rudakubana, who was not treated as a terrorist because he was not ideologically motivated, but who committed a crime that spread as much terror as any conventional act of terrorism. But today you will have woken up to the news on the BBC that Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, has rejected an internal Home Office report calling for the official definition of terrorism to be widened.
The actual situation is complicated. Overnight Policy Exchange, a rightwing thinktank, published a report which included some leaked details of the internal Home Office report, commissioned by Cooper after the Southport killings, with critical commentary. The report is called “Extremely Confused”, which gives a fair view of its assessment of the report, and one of its authors is Andrew Gilligan, a former adviser to Boris Johnson. The paper includes quotes from the leaked report, but Policy Exchange has not published the whole document. Nevertheless, the Policy Exchange report has been widely written up, particularly in Tory papers critical of what the internal Home Office report is saying, and Cooper briefed against it in response.
Here is Rajeev Syal’s report.
There is bound to be more on this later today.
But the main interest this morning may be the start of evidence sessions for the public bill committee considering the assisted dying bill. Prof Sir Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer for England, is up first. Whitty has not said much in public about the bill, but last year he and other chief medical officers issued a joint letter saying that, even if the bill does become law, that must not undermine good palliative care. They said:
Whatever parliament decides, we believe the medical profession will be unanimous on two things: that we must not undermine the provision of good end-of-life care for all including the outstanding work done by palliative care clinicians; and that individual doctors and other healthcare workers should be able to exercise freedom of conscience as, for example, happens with abortion care currently. This will, we are sure, be common ground for all sides of this complex societal decision.
The UK CMOs, DCMOs and NHSE National Medical Director have given advice to help doctors wanting to take part in the national debate on assisted dying.
— Professor Chris Whitty (@CMO_England) October 16, 2024
Please see the letter below:https://t.co/ybXSeuUhcj pic.twitter.com/MByUHpqnpI
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.25am: MPs on the public bill committee considering the assisted dying bill start taking evidence from witnesses about the bill, starting with Prof Sir Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer for England. He and other leadering medical experts give evidence this morning. More witnesses give evidence after 2pm, including Sir Max Hill, the former director of public prosecutions.
9.30am: Keir Starmer chairs cabinet.
9.30am: The ONS publishes figures showing by how much the population is expected to grow.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
11.30am: Shabana Mahmood, the justice secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line 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. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
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.
Updated
