Early evening summary
Updated
Today saw the first full opposition day for the Lib Dems in 15 years, as they brought a debate on the carer’s allowance overpayments scandal, which has seen carers required to pay back vast amounts of money due to small, often unnoticed, overpayments, Rosie Anfilogoff reports. She says:
Ed Davey, who is a carer for his disabled son, called the overpayments a “terrible scandal” and raised issues with the current system of carer’s allowance, categorising it as a “daft way of operating”. He, and many others, were particularly concerned with the “cliff-edge” aspect of the payments, which means accidentally earning just 1p over the limit allows the entire allowance to be taken away from carers.
Mel Stride, the former work and pensions secretary, ignored calls for him to apologise, despite overseeing the department during the scandal, which left one in five working unpaid carers affected by overpayments.
Many MPs called for the overpayments to be written off - but Stride called that an “absurdity”.
Today, the government announced a review into the scandal, with Liz Sayce OBE leading the review. MPs welcomed this, but many were disappointed by the review’s lack of breadth, wishing for greater reform to the carer’s allowance system. Davey said the government should “reshape” the review to include wider issues like the “way too low” payments carers receive.
Alison McGovern, the employment minister, sought to reassure MPs, saying the government is “fully aware of all of the issues carers face” and committed to exploring solutions.
Updated
Four cabinet minister have entries in the list of updates to the register of MPs’ interests.
Peter Kyle, the science secretary, has declared two tickets, and hospitality, at a Taylor Swift concert, worth a total of £584, paid for by the Football Association.
Ian Murray, the Scottish secretary, has declared lunch and a ticket to a Liverpool v Bournemouth, where he had a meeting with the CEO of Scottish Salmon. It cost £360, and Scottish Salmon paid.
Lucy Powell, the leader of the Commons, has declared three gifts: two tickets for the FA Cup final in May, worth £400, paid for by the FA; two tickets for the British Grand Prix at Silverstone in July, worth £464, paid for by Siverstone; and two tickets with hospitality for a Davis Cup match in Manchester in September, worth £570, paid for by the Lawn Tennis Association.
And Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, has declared the loan of clothing from the 223 Agency, even though she says the estimated value is below the threshold where donations have to be declared (£300).
Greenpeace expresses concern about review of Defra regulations to ensure they deliver growth
Environmental groups are alarmed at plans to prioritise economic growth in the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Dan Corry, an economist who worked as head of the No 10 policy unit under Gordon Brown, has been drafted in to overhaul the environmental regulators and ensure they are delivering growth.
However, environmental experts argue that regulators should put the health of the natural environment first and that it is a perverse incentive to tell the environment department to prioritise economics.
But Labour has been in favour of a growth duty for some time. Labour MPs voted with the then-Tory government last year to enshrine an economic growth duty in the rules of the regulator Ofwat because they did not want to be accused of being anti-growth.
Greenpeace UK’s director of policy Dr Doug Parr said:
Our natural world supplies incalculable benefits for our health, not to mention the food we eat and vital services such as carbon sequestration and flood management. All of these things bring economic benefits that rarely appear in the spreadsheets of economists in Whitehall and the private sector.
That’s why it’s concerning to see regulations being put in a separate column to ‘economic growth’. Regulations are a last defence for our few remaining wild places, countless species, our seas and waterways, and all of the value they provide to society. Of course Defra is a ‘key economic growth department’ by virtue of its fundamental role as custodian of the riches of the natural world.
If Dan Corry’s role is genuinely to make regulations more efficient, we wish him luck. But the mood music sounds concerningly like the ‘bonfire of red tape’ so often touted by the last government.
In a speech on Monday, Keir Starmer said that he would judge regulations by whether or not they were promoting growth, and that he wanted to “rip out the bureaucracy that blocks investment”.
Kemi Badenoch has declared more than twice the amount of donations to her leadership campaign in October as her opponent Robert Jenrick, the latest MPs’ register of interests has revealed. PA Media says:
Badenoch received more than £130,000 in donations so far this month, including £25,000 from financier Wol Kolade and £20,000 from businessman Charles Keymer, who has now donated a total of £60,000 to her campaign.
Jenrick declared just two donations in today’s update to the register of interests, amounting to £55,000 in total.
These were one £30,000 donation from businessman and former Spectator owner Sir Henry Keswick and a £25,000 donation from Access Industries (UK) Ltd, a company owned by billionaire Sir Len Blavatnik.
Updated
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, has declared five income payments in the latest update to the register of members’ interests. They show how much he earns from the media.
Farage is a presenter for GB News and he has declared £60,389, received at the end of September, for about 20 hours work.
He has also declared four other payments: £164 from X, which pays some people who post on the site and generate ad revenue; £786 from Meta, which owns Instagram, another site that pays content creators; £12,248 from Cameo, which allows people to buy personalised messages from celebrities; and £3,044 from Google, which owns YouTube.
Ministers have written to Keir Starmer expressing alarm about the cuts they are being asked to accept in the budget, Ailbhe Rea and Alex Wickham report in a story for Bloomberg. They say:
Multiple members of the premier’s cabinet have sent formal letters to the premier about cuts they’re being asked to make in the one-year departmental spending review to be announced alongside the budget, according to the people, who requested anonymity discussing behind-the-scenes communications. They spoke about the letters on the condition the departments involved weren’t identified.
The unease at the top level of government highlights the political tightrope that chancellor of the exchequer Rachel Reeves is treading as she seeks to restore order to Britain’s public finances through a combination of taxes and spending cuts totaling £40bn ($52bn).
Downing Street told Bloomberg this was a routine part of the budget process.
A donor is paying for a private charter flight to return the body of Alex Salmond to Scotland from North Macedonia, where he died suddenly on Saturday. In a statement, the Scottish government said:
Over the last few days the Scottish government and UK government have been engaging with Alex Salmond‘s family and working closely together in accordance with their wishes, to ensure the swift and dignified repatriation of the former first minister to Scotland.
Having explored a number of options, the family have now made arrangements for this to take place with the support of a private citizen.
The Scottish government continues to engage with Mr Salmond‘s family, and we stand ready to offer further advice and support, should it be required.
According to the BBC, there will be a private funeral for Salmond, followed by a public memorial service later.
According to Sky News, Israel’s national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, has dismissed the news that the UK government has considered imposing sanctions on him over his support for settlers in the West Bank attacking Palestinians. (See 12.21pm.) Ben-Gvir told Israeli media:
Just as before the establishment of the Jewish state the British worked to make it impossible, now they continue to do so after its establishment in the midst of an existential war …
They do not scare me, and I will continue to act in accordance with the supreme national interests of the state of Israel only and for the people of the country.
Unpaid carers welcome Liz Kendall’s plan to review benefit rules
Unpaid carers have welcomed plans to launch a review of “outdated” benefit rules that have left tens of thousands of people who look after loved ones with huge debts and threatened with prosecution, and triggered a scandal, Patrick Butler and Josh Halliday report.
In July Wes Streeting, the health secretary, published the interim report from Dr Penny Dash into the Care Quality Commission. It said CQC ratings could not be trusted, Rosie Anfilogoff reports. She goes on:
The government has now published the full report from the Dash review into the CQC, the independent regulator of health and social care in England which is meant to ensure organisations like hospitals and care homes are safe and effective.
The full report depicts a CQC that functions poorly, leaving patients without the ability to make informed choices on their care, and providers without proper oversight.
In recent years there has been a stark reduction in activity, with the number of inspections and assessments undertaken in 2023 and 2024 almost half what they were in 2018 and 2019.
According to CQC data given to the review, the average age of ratings is 3.9 years old, but there is at least one hospital that was last rated over 10 years ago.
And, the report finds, the CQC has never even rated 19% of locations under its purview. For institutions found to require improvement, the delay for a re-inspection has increased to almost a year when previously it was 152 days, leaving providers stuck in limbo.
The government has welcomed the seven recommendations set out in the report, and Sir Julian Hartley will shortly begin as the CQC’s new chief executive.
Justin Welby, the archbishop of Canterbury, has warned that legalising assisted dying is dangerous and risks turning the right to die into a duty. He made his comments in an article in the Daily Mail, published before the private member’s terminally ill adults (end of life) bill was formally presented to the Commons today. Matthew Weaver has the story.
No 10 says it was 'entirely right' for government to talk to police about security issues around Taylor Swift concert
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing Downing Street defended the right of ministers to be involved in discussions with the police over the security for the Taylor Swift concerts in London.
Keir Starmer has been dogged by questions about the concerts, and the decision to give Swift a police escort to them, for days, with some newspapers suggesting there was an improper link between Swift getting a police escort, which is unusual for celebrities, and Starmer being offered free tickets for her concerts.
Starmer has repaid the value of the tickets, and No 10 insists that the decision to provide an escort was a matter for the Metropolitan police. Yesterday No 10 rejected the claim the tickets had been a thank you gift for Starmer after the police escort was provided.
Today the PM’s spokesperson insisted – more strongly than it has done in the past – that the security issues raised by the tour meant it was appropriate for the government to be involved in talks with the Met about what should happen. The spokesperson said:
It is entirely right, and I think the public will expect the government, the police, the mayor of London to be involved in discussions and planning of events to ensure that they run smoothly, that the public is kept safe and that the government is sufficiently reassured – and in this case, in the context of recent terrorist plots overseas – that that public safety is maintained at all times …
You should expect the government to have conversations with the police on events of this magnitude and scale … and for that to be entirely consistent with the Met being operationally independent.
The spokesperson also said Starmer would not be referring himself to the independent adviser on ministerial standards on this issue.
Updated
No 10 rejects claims Treasury's £40bn funding gap analysis means Labour misled voters at election about its tax plans
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing Downing Street rejected suggestions that the latest Treasury briefing about a £40bn funding gap in spending plans (see 9.22am) meant Labour misled voters about its tax plans at the election. During the campaign, Labour set out plans to raise taxes by £7.3bn.
Asked if the public had been misled, the PM’s press secretary said:
No. So we stand by our commitments in the manifesto, which was fully funded.
We were honest with the British public, both during the election and since, about the scale of the challenge that we would receive.
Then, of course, one of the first things the chancellor did when we came in was do an audit of the books and found a £22bn black hole that the previous government lied about and covered up.
So that’s why we have continued to be honest with the British people that there are going to be difficult decisions in this budget, and that’s because of the mess that the Conservatives left the economy in.
Updated
Starmer suggests he would like to work on cross-party basis to tackle problems with special educational needs provision
During PMQs Keir Starmer said the government would work on a cross-party basis to find a solution to problems with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) provision.
He was responding to a question from the Tory MP Simon Hoare, chair of the public administration and constitutional affairs committee, who said:
As evidenced by some earlier questions [see 12.05pm], issues surrounding Send, local government finance and adult social care are issues which affect all of our constituents.
And let’s be honest, for too long both parties have ducked and dodged taking the difficult but necessary decisions.
In order to give certainty to our constituents and confidence to those who provide those vital services, does the prime minister share my assessment that there is considerable merit in formal cross-party working on these issues where we can share taking those difficult decisions in order to improve outcomes for our constituents?
Starmer replied:
I am grateful to him for raising this question about Send, because it is a really important issue and I think this is the fourth time in two PMQs where it has been raised on both sides of the house.
I quibble with his suggestion it’s both parties, since his party was in power for 14 years.
But the spirit in which he puts this forward, that this should be cross-party, is something that we should take up, because it’s such an important issue and it affects so many children and parents and therefore, notwithstanding the quibble, I am very happy to work across the house on an issue as important as this.
Conservative MP Simon Hoare asks the PM about provisions for SEND families and calls for cross-party work to deal with the issue
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) October 16, 2024
Keir Starmer says it's an issue that "affects so many children and parents" and welcomes the call for cross-party work#PMQs https://t.co/Y02YRojhcC pic.twitter.com/eTczDUJClt
PMQs - snap verdict
The opposition leader does not normally raise foreign affairs at PMQs and, when they do, it is normally a) because a global crisis is dominating the news to such an extent that they can’t ignore it, and b) a sign that party politics is going to take a back seat, because often there is cross-party consensus on global issues.
Today Rishi Sunak chose to devote all his six questions to China, and related national security issues, and it was not entirely clear why. David Lammy is due to visit China, Chinese tensions with Taiwan are on the rise, but it was not a topic that anyone will have felt Sunak had to raise. It is an issue on which the Conservative party is more or less united, but the same applies to putting up taxes (like China, another thing Tories don’t approve of), and Sunak could easily have devoted his questions to budget issues again.
Perhaps Sunak really does believe the line that his party peddled during the election campaign about Starmer being soft on national security? But if he was trying to show that today, he failed badly. To his first three questions, all demanding a tough stance against China on various issues, Starmer was more than happy to agree.
Sunak then tried more critical questions, suggesting that Starmer was being soft on national security because the government has not yet used the foreign influence registration scheme to impose constraints on Chinese lobbying (something that Sunak’s own government was dragging its feet over more than a year ago) and because the government has shelved the Freedom of Speech Act for universities (a measure that the Tories always presented as an anti-woke law, not an anti-China law, when they actually passed it). On both these points, the Sunak critique flopped. On the first point, Starmer just told Sunak he was wrong, and on the second he ignored it witheringly, and criticised the Tory leader for being partisan. Sunak sounded half-hearted, or badly informed. If he really felt these were important points, he should have pursued them.
A good rule in the Commons it to reply to a question in the manner in which it is asked – constructively if it constructive, and aggressively if it is aggressive. Starmer did ramp up the party politics a bit in his final answers, but Labour MPs may have liked it if he had done that even more.
Updated
I have beefed up some of the earlier posts with direct quotes from the exchanges between Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak. You may need to refresh the page to get the updates to appear.
Blair McDougall (Lab) asks if the PM agrees with the comments from the White House about the need for the Israeli government to stop blocking aid to Gaza.
Starmer says he does agree with those comments. The UK is convening a meeting of the security council on this, he says.
And that’s the end of PMQs.
Starmer backs 'wider devolution' to councils, but declines to support call for Cornwall to get its own assembly
Ben Maguire (Lib Dem) asks if the PM will meet all Cornish MPs to discuss devolution for Cornwall, and the case for giving it an assembly.
Starmer says he does believe in devolving power to local authorities. He wants deeper and wider devolution to local government.
UPDATE: Maguire said:
Will the prime minister meet with all six Cornish MPs to discuss devolution for Cornwall, with a Cornish assembly which recognises our unique culture, language and national minority status, so we can finally unleash Cornwall’s economic potential?
And Starmer replied:
I do believe in transferring power out of Westminster and into the hands of leaders who know their communities best, those with skin in the game know what’s best for their communities.
We are already making steps in the south-west by signing the devolution agreement for Devon and Torbay, I actually encourage local authorities to work with their neighbours to pursue deeper and wider devolution for their area.
Updated
Kit Malthouse (Con) says during the election Starmer made an unequivocal promise to rebuild Basingstoke hospital. Does that promise still apply?
Starmer says the government is reviewing the programme of the last government. But it is flawed, he says. There were not 40 hospitals, they were not all new, and they were not all funded. He says it is important that voters know who is to blame if what the last government promised does not happen.
Shaun Davies (Lab) asks what the government is doing to reduce suicide rates amongst men.
Starmer says the figures for male suicide are “truly shocking”. He recalls going to an event where men were asked if they knew someone who had died from suicide, and he says he reflected on his own experience (implying this has happened to someone he knows).
Ann Davies (Plaid Cymru) asks if the government will introduce a social tariff to help pensioners with energy bills.
Starmer takes that as a question about winter fuel payments, and says pensioners will be better off because of the triple lock.
Starmer says the Tories want to get rid of maternity pay, but keep hereditary peers.
The budget will drive economic growth, improve the lives of working people, fix public service and provide the basis for national renewal, he says.
Adrian Ramsay, the Green party’s co-leader, asks when the government will start negotiations on dental contract reform, to improve access to NHS dentistry.
Starmer says dentistry was left in a shocking state. Under the Tories, tooth decay became the most common reason for children to be admitted to hospital, he says.
Starmer says he is happy to work on a cross-party basis to see what can be done to improve provision for families with children with special educational needs and disabilities. But he does not accept that both parties are equally at fault in allowing services to deterioriate.
Starmer says government considering imposing sanctions on two Israeli ministers over 'abhorrent' comments
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, starts by welcoming the news that the government will review the way carer’s allowance operates, and how people have been aggressively penalised over over-payments.
We have the story here.
Starmer says he hopes the review will resolve these problems.
Davey asks if the UK will sanction two Israeli ministers – the finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, and the national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir – who have made extremist comments about starving Gaza and backing Israeli settlers in the West Bank who have attacked Palestinians. Yesterday David Cameron said the last government was considering this.
Davey says Smotrich said that starving two million people in Gaza might be justified, and Ben-Gvir called Israeli settlers who killed a teenager heroes.
Starmer says the government is “looking at that” because the comments made were “abhorrent”.
UPDATE: Starmer said:
We are looking at that because they’re obviously abhorrent comments … along with other really concerning activity in the West Bank but also across the region.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza is dire, the death toll has surpassed 42,000 and access to basic services is becoming much harder,
Israel must take all possible steps to avoid civilian casualties, to allow aid into Gaza in much greater volumes and provide the UN humanitarian partners the ability to operate effectively.
Lib Dem leader Ed Davey asks the PM to sanction "extremist" Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich
— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) October 16, 2024
Keir Starmer says Ben-Gvir and Smotrich's comments were "abhorrent" and "will look at" possible sanctions#PMQs https://t.co/Y02YRojhcC pic.twitter.com/fYbmvIFexY
Updated
Starmer says the last government let councils down. Local services were destroyed over 14 years, he says. He says the government will get councils back on their feet.
And he says he was surprised Sunak did not mention the £63bn investment coming to the UK.
Sunak says the Tories are concerned that the government has halted or slowed measures introduced by his government that would protect the UK.
He asks if the foreign secretary will tell the Chinese they should lift the sanctions imposed on British MPs.
“Yes,” says Starmer, implying he will.
But then he attacks the record of the last government, saying it did not offer stability. He says his government will fix the foundations and provide better government.
Sunak says he thinks the foreign agents scheme has been blocked.
But he moves on, and claims that the government has dropped provisions to limit Chinese influence in universities.
Starmer says Sunak should not be trying to make party political points out of a national security issue.
UPDATE: Sunak said:
We passed the Freedom of Speech Act with new powers to help defend universities from [Chinese influence] but the new education secretary has since blocked it. So can the prime minister tell us how without this tool the government will prevent Chinese influence over our universities?
And Starmer said:
I really don’t think party political points on national security are at all appropriate.
Honestly, throughout the last parliament we stood with the government on all questions on security and intelligence because it was important to the outside world that we did so.
I worked with the security and intelligence services for five years prosecuting cases. I know first-hand the work that they do as a lawyer, I’ve known first hand the work that they do as prime minister.
We support them in everything that they do and he knows that.
Updated
Sunak says the PM has halted the implementation of the foreign agents registration scheme, a provision included in the national security legislation passed by the last government.
The last government also established a new system of registration and monitoring to protect the UK from interference from foreign states, including China, Russia and Iran.
It’s called the foreign influence registration scheme, it was described as essential by MI5 in the fight to help keep Britain safe. But since the prime minister took office, he has halted its implementation. Why?
Starmer replies simply: “That is not correct.”
Updated
Sunak says the foreign secretary should unequivocally condemn the Chinese aggression.
Given what the prime minister said, and I agree, of course, we must engage when we should use that engagement for our national interests, I hope that the Foreign Secretary will unequivocally condemn this military escalation and stand up for democracy in Taiwan.
Now, the whole house will be concerned about the fate of the democracy campaigner Jimmy Lai. He is a British citizen who has been wrongly imprisoned in Hong Kong for four years.
The previous government pressured China for his release. Does the prime minister agree that this is a politically motivated prosecution and that it is a breach of China’s legal obligations to Hong Kong under the Sino-British [Joint] Declaration?
Starmer says the government does agree with that. He says it has made diplomatic representations to that effect.
Yes, and this case, as he will understand, is a priority for the government. We do call on the Hong Kong authorities to release immediately our British national and the Foreign Secretary raised this case, in his first meeting with China’s foreign minister, and we will continue to do so.
UPDATE: In another question Sunak said:
China, as [Starmer] knows, has become a decisive enabler of Russia’s war against Ukraine, supplying the vast majority now of Russia’s imported military microelectronics and components, worsening the suffering of the Ukrainian people.
So can the prime minister confirm that he is prepared to sanction any Chinese business or individual involved in aiding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, including secondary sanctions on financial institutions?
And Starmer replied:
Yes, and we’ve called for that in the past. We continue to do so, and I hope this is an issue where we can have unity across the house.
Updated
Starmer says China's military activity in Taiwan Strait 'not conducive to peace and stability'
Rishi Sunak says China has carried out aggressive exercises in the Taiwan Strait. Will the foreign secretary use his meetings in Beijing this week to condemn this action?
Starmer says the activity in the Taiwan strait is not conducive to peace. He says the government will cooperate with China where it can, but challenge it where it has to.
UPDATE: Sunak said:
This week, China has carried out unwarranted, aggressive and intimidatory military exercises in the Taiwan Strait. Our allies are rightly concerned after worrying reports that the government may have intervened to stop a visit to the UK by the former Taiwanese president.
Can the prime minister confirm that the foreign secretary will use his meetings in Beijing this week to condemn China’s dangerous escalatory acts in the strait?
And Starmer replied:
The continued military activity in the Strait is not conducive to peace and stability. Stability in the Taiwan Strait is in all of our interests.
On the wider point that he raises, we will co-operate where we can as permanent members of the UN security council, issues like net zero, health and trade, compete where we have different interests, but challenge, the point he makes is absolutely right, where it’s needed to protect national security, human rights and our values, and we will put that challenge in.
Updated
Alison Hume (Lab) asks about a centre in her constituency providing help for children with special educational needs. Does the PM agree that Send (special educational needs and disabilities) provision needs to get better.
Starmer says children with Send have been let down for too long. He says the government will address that, so every child can achieve their potential.
Updated
Keir Starmer starts with a tribute to Alex Salmond, saying he was a “monumental figure”. He also pays tribute to David Amess, the Tory MP killed three years ago this week, to the Holocaust survivor Lily Ebert, who died recently, and to General Sir Mike Jackson, whose death has just been announced.
For journalists attending the Robert Jenrick speech and Q&A, one of the most interesting moments came when Jenrick claimed not to know that a German, Thomas Tuchel, has been appointed as the new England manager.
'I haven't even seen this news'
— ITV News Politics (@ITVNewsPolitics) October 16, 2024
Tory leadership hopeful @RobertJenrick finds out Thomas Tuchel is the new England manager during a press conference pic.twitter.com/ornxh81mUN
Popular Conservatism, the Tory group set up by Liz Truss’s allies to promote libertarian ideas, has said it is backing Robert Jenrick for Tory leader. In a statement its director, Mark Littlewood, said:
The choice between Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick is finely balanced. Both have strong conservative convictions, a great ability to articulate these values and a clear strategy for leading the party back to power. Our own supporters have been fairly even split between the two of them since the contest began.
Whoever the party decides to pick, Conservatives can have great confidence that there is every chance not just of swiftly improving the electoral fortunes of the party, but of winning the next election outright.
However, on balance, we recommend voting for Robert Jenrick. He has laid out a clear policy plan, displayed a coherent understanding of what has gone wrong for the party in recent years, has committed to major democratic reform of the party itself and is very well placed to win over supporters who are presently attracted to Reform UK. He has shown he is willing to make bold decisions - particularly highlighted by his determination to leave the ECHR. We think he is the best option for making conservatism and the Conservative party popular again.
PMQs will be starting shortly. Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.
Q; Do you think Rishi Sunak’s tax cuts were sustainable?
Jenrick says Sunak was right to prioritise tax cuts for working people. He would like to go further. But he does not want to repeat the mistakes of Liz Truss’s mini-budget, which combined tax cuts with massive spending on the energy bills bailout. He says the Tories need to restore their reputation for sound management of the public finances.
And that’s the end of the Q&A.
Jenrick says he wants to improve the performance of the public sector by getting rid of bad managers. He says in 90% of NHS trusts last year not a single manager was sacked for poor performance. That would not happen in the private sector, he says.
Jenrick claims leaving ECHR would save government money by cutting bill for housing illegal migrants
Q: What would be the economic impact of leaving the European convention on human rights? Businesses say they want stability.
Jenrick says leaving the ECHR would have no impact on the economy. But it would save the government “a lot of money because we’re currently spending billions of pounds, as the Labour government is acknowledging today, on housing illegal migrants who are here”.
Q: You said in the speech welfare cuts could save the equivalent of 2p off income tax. Will that be an election pledge?
Jenrick says he won’t write a budget now.
Jenrick says he agrees with Badenoch Tories have 'no divine right to exist' and they face existential challenge
Robert Jenrick has finished his speech, and he is now taking questions.
Q: Kemi Badenoch says she is Labour’s worst nightmare. Is she right?
Jenrick says he agrees that the party is facing an existential moment.
I think that our party faces an existential challenge right now. Our party has no divine right to exist. That’s why we need to get the choice right in this leadership election, and that’s why I stand for ending the drama, ending the excuses, and actually delivering for the British people.
He claims polling suggest he would be the best leader for the party. He says his campaign has moment. Months ago, he was an outsider.
Q: Are you proposing a return to austerity?
Jenrick says he does not see it that way. He thinks says returning welfae payments to levels they were pre-pandemic, or civil service numbers to what they were in 2015, would save huge amounts of money.
According to a report in the Telegraph, Robert Jenrick will be using his speech this morning to argue that student loans should not be available for the worst-performing university courses.
This is another example of a leadership candidate recycling ideas the Tories proposed at the last election. In their 2024 manifesto the Tories said they wanted “to close university courses in England with the worst outcomes for their students”.
Robert Jenrick, the Tory leadership candidate, is giving a speech to the Centre for Policy Studies thinktank now. There is a live feed here.
🚨 LIVE NOW@RobertJenrick delivers a speech to the Centre for Policy Studies
— Centre for Policy Studies (@CPSThinkTank) October 16, 2024
https://t.co/DOBpo24Noy
Chagossians protest that UK's deal with Mauritius won't give them right to return to Diego Garcia
A group representing more than 300 Chagossians has expressed concern that the deal for the UK to hand back its last African colony to Mauritius does not include a right to return to the island of Diego Garcia.
The deal struck earlier this month, which followed years of bitter dispute and court rulings rejecting UK sovereignty over the Chagos Islands, allowed for resettlement, except to Diego Garcia, which is home to a joint UK-US military base and will remain under UK control.
The Chagos Refugees Group, based in Mauritius, said that, at its annual general meeting on 13 October, members unanimously expressed concern that, by not allowing a right of return to the largest of the islands, the agreement disregards the full human rights of Chagossians from the island where most trace their ancestry.
In a letter to the British high commissioner in Mauritius, Charlotte Pierre, the Chagos Refugee Group’s president, Olivier Bancoult, said:
We firmly request that all native Chagossians from Diego Garcia and their heirs be granted the right to freely visit and live on Diego Garcia, as is their natural right, given that foreign workers currently have this privilege.
When the agreement was struck, there was a suggestion that Chagossians from Diego Garcia could be prioritised for jobs there.
The letter also calls for Chagossians to be involved in the negotiation process to ensure that Chagossians’ rights and interests are fully safeguarded,”, having previously been excluded, and for “a comprehensive support package for Chagossians born in Chagos and their descendants, including a lifetime pension for those born in Chagos”.
Chagossians were expelled from their homes in the 1960s and 70s in what has been described as a crime against humanity and one of the most shameful episodes of postwar colonialism, to make way for the base on Diego Garcia.
Under the deal, base operations on the island will remain under UK control into the next century – initially for 99 years with the UK having a right to extend.
Badenoch suggests she does not want Boris Johnson back as MP, saying she wants to draw line under last 14 years
Kemi Badenoch, the bookmakers’ favourite in the Conservative leadership contest, has not been doing many broadcast interviews, but she has given an interview published today in the Daily Telegraph. Here are the main lines.
Badenoch said the leadership contest was an “existential” moment for the Conservative party, and that if it were to choose the wrong leader it could end as a political force. The Telegraph headlined on this line, which could be read as a strong attack on her rival, Robert Jenrick. But in the interview the point she really wanted to make was that it would be a mistake for members to think they could elect a leader and then just replace them quickly if they fail, as happened with Iain Duncan Smith, Boris Johnson and Liz Truss (the last three Tory leaders chosen by members). She said:
If we get this wrong, there’s not going to be a party. There’s no second chance. We have one chance to get this right.
This endless tossing out leaders as if they’re just disposable has been one of the things that has damaged the party brand.
People want to see some stability and some certainty. This is not the time for more psychodrama. We need to get serious and I think members are very serious about wanting to pick a leader for the long term, and they are looking very closely at which candidate best represents their views.
Many Tories assume that whoever wins the contest this autum will be replaced after about two years because they are not likely to generate an electoral recovery and because MPs will want to try someone else.
TELEGRAPH: Reeves’s U-turn on dangers of NI rise #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/YSA1X8qZvc
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) October 15, 2024
Badenoch suggested she was not keen to see Boris Johnson return to parliament. Asked if she would like to bring him back, she replied:
I’m very much about the future.
He is a former MP. If there’s an association that thinks that he would be a great MP for them I think that he should be allowed to stand there. But I am not recruiting former prime ministers to say please come back. I’m trying to make sure that we are talking about the future and drawing a line under the last 14 years.
She claimed she would be “Labour’s worst nightmare” as Tory leader. She thinks her ethnicity would make it hard for Labour to depict the Tories as prejudiced, the Telegraph says. And she said:
The team that I’m putting together will be Labour’s worst nightmare, not just me.
I understand them better than they realise. I know where their weak points are. I know that they do not start with principles, or certainly, they don’t have the same principles that we do.
She said too many young people were doing degrees that did not get them into jobs. And she suggested that an apprenticeship she did before going to university was more use to her than her degree. She said:
It cannot be right that we are sending people to do degrees where they can’t get jobs They’re coming out with a lot of debt, and we then wonder why we don’t have people in work …
I can’t remember three quarters of my engineering degree. The apprenticeship I still remember, and that influences a lot of my thinking, the practical skills I got from that I use much more than a lot of the theory which I learnt.
The number of graduate jobs that we have are not enough to sustain the number of people going to university.
She rejected claims that she is dodging a public debate with Jenrick. She said she was also accused of crossing the street to start a fight, and that both charges could not be true.
She criticised Jenrick’s call for the UK to leave the European convention on human rights, saying: “Trying to recreate the [leave/remain] referendum is not something people want to hear right now.”
Rachel Reeves aims to find £40bn in tax rises and spending cuts in budget
Here is Eleni Courea’s story on the Treasury wanting to announce tax rises and spending cuts worth £40bn in the budget.
Treasury minister Darren Jones warns of 'hard' choices in budget, but says change will bring 'better public services'
Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the Treasury, has described today’s fall in inflation (see 9.36am) as “welcome news”. But, in interviews, he also warned there would be “hard” choices in the budget.
Asked whether he could rule out real-terms spending cuts for crucial public services, Jones replied:
We’re setting budgets for public services at the end of October for one financial year, 25/26.
We will not be returning to austerity and we will present an honest set of spending plans that deal with the £22bn black hole that we inherited from the previous Conservative government.
That will be hard, but it’s the right thing to do and it’s the start of the period of change under this Labour government that will see better public services over the years ahead.
UK inflation falls below 2% for first time in three and a half years
Inflation in the UK has fallen to its lowest level in three and a half years, giving a pre-budget boost to Rachel Reeves as expectations grow for the Bank of England to cut interest rates. Richard Partington has the story here.
Ben Zaranko, an economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, is complaining about the use of the term “black hole” in budget commentary. He posted this on social media.
I hate the term ‘fiscal black hole’. It’s especially unhelpful and confusing when it’s used interchangeably to mean both:
1) an in-year overspend (in 2024/25); and
2) the amount by which the government is on track to breach its self-imposed fiscal rule (in 2029/30)
Starmer to face PMQs as reports claim Treasury must fill ‘£40bn funding gap’ in budget
Good morning. Governments engage in expectation management, and the latest example is on the front page of the Financial Times this morning, where there is a story saying Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, has identified a “£40bn funding gap” as she prepares the budget, which is happening a fortnight today. In their story George Parker and Sam Fleming report:
UK chancellor Rachel Reeves has identified a £40bn funding gap ahead of her Budget in two weeks — far more than previously expected — as she prepares big tax rises to patch up the NHS.
The figure represents the funding that Reeves needs to protect key government departments from real-terms spending cuts, cover the enduring impact of an annual £22bn overspend and build up a fiscal buffer for the remainder of the parliament.
The Financial Times has been told by officials close to the budget process that the Treasury is seeking ways of closing a shortfall of £40bn, with tax rises set to form the centrepiece of her response.
The FT also points out that Reeves told cabinet colleagues yesterday the budget would require “difficult decisions on spending, welfare, and tax”.
FT UK: Reeves banks on budget tax rises to plug deepening black hole of £40bn #TomorrowsPapersToday pic.twitter.com/fqkP7bOKBj
— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) October 15, 2024
A “funding gap” is what is otherwise described as a black hole in the accounts, and it can be hard to keep track of what the best black hole estimate is because the figures keep changing. Here is a quick recap.
The £22bn black hole: In a statement to MPs in July, Reeves said the Treasury had identified a £22bn gap (difference between the amount the government would have to spend, and the amount actually set aside for spending) in the in-year accounts (ie, for for the 2024-25 budget).
The £100bn black hole: At the time Reeves present the £22bn as principally a problem for the current financial year. But, as Pippa Crerar reports today, she is now telling colleagues that the £22bn gap applies in years going ahead, which adds up to a £100bn black hole over the next five years.
The up to £20bn future black hole generated by unrealistically low spending allocations for the years ahead: During the election campaign the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), and other thinktanks, repeatedly warned that the pending figures set by the Tories for the next five years were implausibly low, and that in practice governments would have to spend between £10bn and £20bn a year more to stop public services collapsing. This black hole is in addition to the £22bn 2024-25 one identified by Reeves.
In an interview with the Today programme this morning, asked about the Treasury’s new £40bn funding gap figure (which government sources have confirmed to the BBC), Paul Johnson, director of the IFS, did not dispute the figure. He said that a “significant amount of additional tax” would be needed, but he said he did not expect taxes to rise by £40bn a year. He said:
If we get tax rises on that scale [£40bn], that really would be extraordinary, I mean unprecedented. That would be tax rises sort of three times as big as George Osborne, for example, introduced back in 2010 in the depths of the aftermath of a financial crisis.
But that said that, if you are as the government wanting to not just protect public services, but significantly increase spending on the health service and increase spending on other things in line with the size of the economy, yes, there is a very big hole in the public finances.
Now, of course, we’ve always known this. We’ve had this discussion through the election, when we [the IFS] were warning that there were these problems, and Keir Starmer and others were going, ‘No, no, no, there’s no such issue’.
Now, £40 billion is a big number. You can get there relatively easily, actually, in terms of the scale of additional spending that will be required down the line. Some of that be covered by slight changes in the fiscal rules. Some of that will be covered by some of the tax rises that the Labour party are already intending. But that would still leave a significant amount of additional tax revenue required.
Figures like the £40bn one don’t end up in the FT, and on the BBC, by accident, and at this stage in the budget cycle most government budget-related communication is best understood as expectation management.
But expectation management can mean two things. It can mean exaggerating how bad things are likely to be, so that on the day voters are pleasantly surprised. But it can just mean dripping out difficult news very slowly, so that when it finally does get confirmed and announced, it is not as much as a shock as it might have been. It is hard to be sure, but what the Treasury is up to now is probably more of the latter than the former.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10.30am: Robert Jenrick, one of the two Tory leadership candidates still in the contest, is giving a speech on the economy.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Rishi Sunak at PMQs.
After 12.30pm: MPs debate a Lib Dem opposition day motion calling for various measures to end the carer’s allowance scandal, including writing off existing overpayments.
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.
Updated
