Friday, January 31, 2025
Lies, incompetence and deceit
In separate article in the Telegraph on 26 June 2016, Boris Johnson claimed: 'British people will still be able to go and work in the EU, to live, to travel, to study, to buy homes and settle down. There will continue to be free trade and access to the EU single market.'
Today is the fifth anninversary of us leaving the EU and judging it on what was promised by the main protaganists above it has been a totla and utter failure. The Independent takes a more measured view, though their conclusion is not much different from mine.
The paper says that Brexiteers promised a new age of British sovereignty, a crackdown on migration and the much-derided “£350m a week” that could be diverted from the EU back into the NHS, but half a decade on, and by many metrics, Brexit appears to have missed the mark:
Since Britain left the EU, migration has been at the highest levels since records began; while key sectors face staffing shortages.
And almost six in 10 Britons (59 per cent) think that Brexit has gone fairly or very badly, with just 12 per cent believing it has gone well, according to a YouGov poll in October.
UK trade expert David Henig told The Independent: ”The UK now has significant trade barriers to its neighbours. It’s something we will have to live with. We will not be allowed to forget it; there will always be issues.”
Brexit-optimist economist Julian Jessop, a fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs, admitted that Brexit has made it harder or “impossible” for small businesses to adjust.
“The UK’s departure from the EU has undoubtedly had some negative effects on the economy, notably through reductions in trade, shortfalls in business investment, and disruption to labour markets,” he told The Independent.
However, he added that the “overall drag on exports and imports has been much smaller than feared”.
Former deputy prime minister Lord Heseltine said that nearly five years on, Brexit “has been a historic disaster”.
“It has destroyed Britain’s leadership in Europe just at a time when there was a critical need (for it), it has closed off opportunities for the younger generation to share in the benefits of Europe and it has denied Britain’s industrial base access to the research and policies of Europe. Our economy is much worse because of it and there is no reputable authority that denies this.
“I think the British people know that they were deceived and the deceit is measured in reduced living standards,” he added.
The numbers speak for themselves:
The latest Treasury estimates show that the cost of Britain’s settlement with the EU stands at approximately £30.2bn in total. This is separate from any estimates of lost money from separating from the EU.
As of the start of 2024, the bulk of this settlement (£23.8bn) had already been paid. Approximately £6.4bn still remained to be paid out to the EU in 2024 and onwards.
The government has not yet published the figure to the end of 2024.
However, this cost is hardly comparable to the forecasted losses from exiting the EU in terms of GDP and trade.
For those who quote the pandemic and the energy crisis as the source of our economic woes it is worth noting that the UK’s GDP took the worst hit compared to all other G7 nations at the time; a 10.3 per cent drop in 2020:
In 2023, Bloomberg Economics estimated that the UK is suffering £100bn a year in lost output from leaving the EU.
The economists Ana Andrade and Dan Hanson wrote that the UK committed “an act of economic self-harm when it voted to leave the EU”, with GDP four per cent smaller than it would have been without Brexit.
In its latest forecasts alongside the new 2024 Budget, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimated that UK trade will take a 15 per cent hit in the long term as a result of Brexit.
The independent financial watchdog pointed to “weak growth in imports and exports over the medium term [which] partly reflects the continuing impact of Brexit”.
Sir Nick Harvey, the CEO of pro-EU think tank European Movement UK, is calling for a closer partnership with Europe to repair some of the economic damage from Brexit.
“Being out of the European single market has now dented the British economy by more than 5 per cent, causing an annual shortfall in Treasury finances of almost £45bn. That equates to around a third of the basic rate income tax yield,” he told The Independent.
“Our future prosperity and security demand a much closer partnership with Europe. The government’s ‘reset’ points in the right direction, but they need to go much further and much faster if we are to build a brighter future.”
A recent study from the Centre for Economic Performance at LSE found that goods exports from the UK dropped by £27bn in 2022 alone as a result of Brexit.
Specifically, the study concludes that the UK’s trade cooperation agreement (TCA), implemented in January 2021, reduced UK goods exports (excluding services) worldwide by 6.4 per cent due to a 13.2 per cent fall in EU exports.
The paper’s authors said that the drop in EU trade post-Brexit was due to the “introduction of new trade barriers under the TCA, rather than the uncertainty of the withdrawal process”.
The study suggests that 16,400 businesses – some 14 per cent of UK exporters – stopped exporting to the EU due to Brexit trade rules.
Though Thomas Sampson, co-author and LSE economics professor, says that the hit to trade was “less than expected”, he also called the TCA a “disaster for small exporters”.
On health, excluding emergency funding due to Covid, the planned NHS budget scarcely increased in 2020/21 and 2021/22, from fiscal year 2022/23, the core NHS budget jumped from £162.3bn to £185.4bn. Although Michael Gove claimed that Brexit had “delivered” on its £350m NHS pledge, no evidence was provided and the budget was still lower than the previous year when including additional Covid spending.
While, leaving the EU did not have the intended effect on net migration. The paper says that free movement was in place until January 2021, but since then, net migration and immigration have soared. At least 3.6 million immigrants have entered the UK since Brexit (between June 2021 and June 2024, the latest available data); with net migration at 2.3 million over that period.
All in all, the whole project has been a complete disaster and we are paying the price.
Thursday, January 30, 2025
Labour government walks into new envionmental controversy
The paper says that Shaun Spiers, executive director at think tank Green Alliance, has warned against "growth at any cost", saying: "The economic case for bigger airports and new roads is highly questionable, and it's crystal clear that pushing ahead with these will fly in the face of the UK's climate targets.”
While David Walsh of the World Wildlife Fund said that Reeves was making a "costly mistake" with airport expansions that take decades to build and increase carbon emissions: "Now is the time to put pounds back in people's pockets by insulating homes, decarbonising power, and investing in public transport":
Ms Reeves also announced backing for the redevelopment of Old Trafford in Manchester, a rail link between Oxford and Cambridge and the building of the Lower Thames Crossing. A planning and infrastructure bill will loosen environmental requirements for developers, she said.
Other environmental groups reacted to the announcement and the revelation that the extra runway would see the number of flights increase to more than 700,000 a year:
Friends of the Earth’s head of campaigns, Rosie Downes, warned that giving the go-ahead to airport expansion while relying on new technology such as sustainable aviation fuels would be a “reckless gamble”.
The Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit’s Colin Walker warned that the pathway to net zero already relies on sustainable fuels, and a third runway will “increase emissions way beyond the capacity of these fuels to offset them”.
This is not going to go down well amongst environmentalists in the Labour Party either, including MPs, some of whom have inherited constituencies which will be directly affected by the airport expansion. Things may well get interesting.
Wednesday, January 29, 2025
Social care in crisis
The paper says that Ramzi Suleiman, policy and public affairs manager at the Carers Trust, has issued a stark warning to the government, arguing that the sector is “nowhere near ready for this rise in older people” as it is “already creaking at the seams”:
Projections from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that, by mid-2047, the number of over-85 will have nearly doubled to 3.3 million, representing 4.3 per cent of the total UK population. This is an increase from 1.7 million in mid-2022, when they made up 2.5 per cent of the population.
The rise comes partly because of the larger numbers of people born in the 1960s, who would be aged over-80 in 2047, as well as general increases in life expectancy, the ONS said.
The warnings came after the government confirmed earlier this month that major social care reforms would not be delivered until 2028, with an independent commission chaired by Baroness Louise Casey launching in spring.
They quote Alison Bennett, the Liberal Democrats care spokesperson, as warning that the government’s “dither and delay on social care will only make matters worse”:
“Across the country we are already seeing thousands of people, who are well enough to be discharged, stuck in hospital beds and unable to leave because social care simply doesn’t exist”, she told The Independent. “These figures show in stark relief that the longer they ignore the crisis, the more social care costs will crush council budgets and lead to unnecessary suffering for individuals.
“That’s why we need the social care commission to be done and dusted within a year at most, it is more pressing than ever. We can then finally move on with implementing much-needed reforms after too many years of inaction.”
This is not something that can be kicked into the long grass by yet another commission, nor can the government hope to get to grips with the health service without sorting out social care. This is already a crisis, and without action it will only get worse.
Tuesday, January 28, 2025
Another Labour u-turn?
The paper says that Lilian Greenwood backed a private member’s bill tabled last May calling for Graduated Driver Licensing (GDL), which places restrictions on newly qualified drivers and has been adopted in many countries, but after Keir Starmer appointed her minister for the future of roads following the general election, she said she was not considering introducing the scheme.
Greenwood has not explained, however, why she has dropped a policy she recognised as potentially life-saving a few months earlier:
Campaigners expressed frustration over the shelving of measures they hoped would resemble those in the US, Australia and New Zealand by imposing night-time curfews on new drivers and restricting the numbers of young passengers they can carry.
Supporters of GDL in Britain point to the 4,959 people who were killed or seriously injured in collisions involving young drivers in 2023 (the latest year for which data is available) – around a fifth of the national total. Young drivers (aged 17 to 24) are disproportionately involved in serious collisions at night and when carrying passengers and two-thirds of those involved are men.
The statistics were compounded by a tragic collision near Wakefield on Friday night in which an 18-year-old driver and two of his teenage passengers were killed. Two other men in the car were rushed to hospital, one of whom remained in hospital with life-threatening injuries on Monday.
Several road safety campaign groups have promoted GDL in Britain for years. They have been joined in the past few months by The AA and the National Fire Chiefs Council.
Edmund King, director of The AA Charitable Trust, said: “There are far too many weekends when we hear about carnage on our roads often involving three or four teenagers in a car.
“There is solid evidence from other countries that measures such as restricting the number of peer-age passengers in the cars of new drivers under 21 years of age would save between 20 to 40 per cent casualties of young drivers and passengers. In the UK we believe this could save up to 58 lives per year.
Let's hope that whatever measures Greenwood does bring in are as effective in preventing more young deaths.
Monday, January 27, 2025
Does Labour have a hidden agenda to introduce ID cards?
Their fears revolve around plans launched last week by Peter Kyle, the technology secretary, for a gov.uk app and gov.uk wallet, intended to save time and hassle for millions by allowing them to carry on their phones digital versions of paper documents, similar to e-government apps already in use in countries including Poland, Estonia and Iceland.
These documents would include proofs of right to work in the UK, rights to benefits, veteran ID cards and DBS certificates, which employers use to check the criminal record of someone applying for a role. They add that the technology will include biometric security such as face scans:
Kyle said the technology would be voluntary and paper documents would continue to be used, but added that he was striving to make the app’s convenience so “compelling” that people would consider its use “unavoidable”.
The app will include a digital document wallet similar to those already installed on Apple and Google smartphones and will be “totally reminiscent of the way you shop, the way you bank, the way you travel and this is now the way you interact with your government”, Kyle said.
But campaigners are now calling for greater transparency about the new systems’ privacy impact before they are rolled out later this year.
“Kyle will not be department of science, innovation and technology minister for ever, and a future government could easily use the optional digital wallet as the launch pad for a mandatory ID scheme,” said Silkie Carlo, the director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group.
“The addition of our facial recognition data makes this sprawling identity system incredibly sensitive, intrusive and a honeypot for hackers.”
James Baker, the campaigns manager at Open Rights Group, said: “Is there going to be pressure for the app to become the portal that you have to interact with the government through?
“Do you end up in a world where it’s meant to be voluntary but it becomes so widely accepted that you can’t live without it? One future problem is it ends up evolving into a national identity database where every interaction is tracked, which has considerable privacy implications.”
The government is insistent of course that the use of this app will be purely voluntary and that there will be no central database. Officials also insist that the app and wallet will be highly secure, using security features that are built into modern smartphones, including facial recognition checks similar to those used when people pay using a digital bank card.
Nevertheless, Labour have form when it comes to ID cards, and it would be helpful to have assurances and some safeguards in place to ensure that this is not the start of something more.
Sunday, January 26, 2025
Opinion poll puts pressure on Starmer for closer European ties
The paper says that an MRP survey of almost 15,000 people by YouGov for the Best for Britain thinktank shows more people in every constituency in England, Scotland and Wales back closer arrangements with the EU rather than more transatlantic trade with Washington.
They add that even in Nigel Farage’s seat of Clacton, more people think the UK is better off trading more with its neighbours on the continent than with the US under the Reform UK leader’s ally Donald Tump:
The findings come as the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, on Sundaytells the Observer that Brexit has harmed the UK economy and that she is determined to claw back some of the lost gross domestic product (GDP) by reducing trade frictions for UK small businesses wherever possible. In one of the clearest statements by a senior government minister on Brexit, Reeves answered yes when asked if she was clear that leaving the EU had damaged the UK’s financial position.
The chancellor, who discussed possible ways to improve trade with EU finance ministers and others at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, said there were “loads of external estimates” showing the negative impact of Brexit on the UK economy and added: “What I want to do is get some of that GDP back by having a better trading relationship with the European Union.”
Reeves also enthused about one specific proposal, saying it was “great”, made by the EU’s new trade chief responsible for post-Brexit negotiations, Maroš Šefčovič , who floated the idea of the UK joining the Pan-Euro Mediterranean convention (PEM). The PEM is a set of common rules for sourcing parts and ingredients for use in tariff-free trade.
Reeves said: “They would not have made those suggestions a year or two ago because they knew they did not have a UK government that was interested. So the fact that they are putting those things out there shows there is a better deal to be had than the one we have at the moment. We look forward to exploring those options with them.”
Reeves’s comments are striking because Keir Starmer’s government has been fearful of moving too fast to foster closer links with the EU because of concerns that it would boost support for Reform among Brexit supporters.
But with Reeves’s sights now fixed intently on stimulating economic growth by whatever means, the Treasury appears to be leading the charge to improve trade with the EU.
With goods traded by UK companies to and from the EU facing time-consuming and costly delays at borders as checks are conducted, with possible US tariffs and with restrictions on the free movement of labour causing shortages in key areas, the only way that we can start to grow the economy is through these closer economic links. The sooner, the better.
Saturday, January 25, 2025
Tories rush to disown Truss
The paper says that on Monday night, just hours after Trump was sworn in as president, the former prime minister, who lasted just 49 days in Downing Street, stood up at one of the official balls celebrating the inauguration and gave an impromptu speech.
They add that Truss is said to have repeated the line that Britain needs its own Trump, and praised the incoming US president for “saving Western civilisation”:
But Ms Truss’s interventions are causing alarm in the Conservative Party, with a number of Tories concerned that she is “becoming an embarrassment”. On Thursday, The Guardian reported that that current Tory leader, Kemi Badenoch, had suggested at a shadow cabinet meeting that she “wants Liz Truss to shut up for a while”.
Two Conservatives visiting Washington DC for the Trump inauguration this week told The Independent that “she needs to take a holiday”, with one suggesting it should be “for at least a year”.
The scars left by the former prime minister’s disastrous mini-Budget, along with memories of the Daily Star’s lettuce campaign, still linger.
Ms Truss has not commented on the suggestions that she should disappear from the public gaze for a while, although an ally suggested that the comments were likely to have the opposite effect.
When The Independent caught up with Ms Truss at an inauguration event, she said she had “no intention of joining Reform” and would be staying with the Tories, arguing that “party support is a distraction at the moment”.
However, her conversion to Trumpian Maga politics has astonished some observers, particularly those who are concerned with culture war issues.
With Ms Truss now posing as a hardliner against trans and LGBT+ rights and diversity issues, one former civil servant who worked for her when she was a senior minister in charge of these matters recalled that she was known for her progressive views. Indeed, some reforms to transgender rights took place under her watch.
Ms Truss is a regular visitor to the powerful Heritage Foundation in Washington DC, which led the way in developing the ultra-conservative Project 2025 policy manual for the Trump administration. But her presence there has caused division among senior members of the Tory party, who are split over her past record as a minister.
One source noted: “Liz was originally against Brexit and was for David Cameron. She was the Queen of woke.”
With opportunism like that it is no wonder that Badenoch and her colleagues are keen for a prolonged period of silence.
Friday, January 24, 2025
Will Labour kill off the landmark climate and nature bill?
The paper says that supporters of the climate and nature bill, introduced by the Liberal Democrat MP Roz Savage, say Labour have insisted on the removal of clauses that would require the UK to meet the targets it agreed to at Cop and other international summits:
Although it is a private member’s bill, more than 80 Labour MPs, including several ministers, had publicly signed up to support it.
Some Labour MPs have been ordered to attend the bill’s second reading on Friday morning and to prepare speeches, to deliberately make it run out of time and avoid a vote. Another possibility would be a three-line whip to vote against the bill, leaving any rebels at risk of disciplinary action, including losing the party whip.
Nature and climate charities say the bill would introduce vital steps to tackle nature depletion and the climate crisis. Photograph: Alan Novelli/Alamy A Downing Street spokesperson said the government’s position “will be set out at second reading”.
Nature and climate charities have urged ministers to adopt Savage’s bill, saying it would introduce vital concrete steps to tackle nature depletion and the climate crisis.
Savage, the South Cotswolds MP who is also an environmental activist and a former ocean rower, came third in September’s ballot for private member’s bills, meaning she would almost certainly get enough parliamentary time for it to pass with Labour support.
However, talks stalled over Labour’s insistence at removing the parts of the bill that would make it legally binding for ministers to meet the targets signed up for in international treaties.
Supporters of the bill believed this was too big a compromise and would make the bill largely pointless. They sought to negotiate again with Labour whips, but were told there would be no concessions, it is understood.
As late as Thursday afternoon there were last-ditch efforts to find a compromise, including talks with Ed Miliband, the energy and climate change secretary. But for now, Labour MPs remain instructed to sink the bill.
This bill is the first real test of this government's commitment to tackling climate change. Will they flunk it?
Thursday, January 23, 2025
Major supermarket comes out against Labour's 'tractor tax'
The paper says that the retailer has backed farmers in their fight against the inheritance tax raid, with its chief commercial officer warning the “UK’s future food security is at stake”:
In a triple blow to the chancellor as she seeks to woo business investment to the UK at the World Economic Forum in Davos two more huge supermarkets, Lidl and the Co-Op, also called on her to pause the policy.
The interventions mean Tesco, British agriculture’s biggest customer, Lidl and the Co-Op have joined other major supermarket chains Sainsbury’s, Asda and Morrisons in backing farmers.
To add to her woes, a new report by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) warned the policy may raise less than the Treasury hopes, with the £500m-a year-revenue forecast given a “high” uncertainty rating and likely to fall after seven years as families use tax planning to avoid the charge.
Tesco’s chief commercial officer Ashwin Prasad said that ensuring farms remained economically sustainable was “essential” not just to food security but so customers “can continue to get the great quality food they want, at a price they can afford”.
The calls will increase pressure on Ms Reeves to U-turn on her controversial tax raid. The chancellor has faced a furious backlash to her Budget decision to extend inheritance tax to family farms, which critics warn could sound the death knell for family farms in England.
The changes mean that farms valued at £1m or more would be liable for 20 per cent inheritance tax.
The Treasury says that, with tax allowances, in reality, only farms worth £3m would be affected, just 28 per cent of family farms. But official Defra figures appear to suggest as many as 66 per cent could be hit.
Thousands of farmers brought Westminster to a standstill in November when they descended on the capital to voice their opposition to the change.
Mr Prasad said: “One message is loud and clear: farmers desperately need more certainty. After years of policy change, it has been harder than ever for them to plan ahead or to invest in their farms.
“One current area of uncertainty is the proposed change to inheritance tax relief. With many smaller farms relying on APR [agricultural property relief] and BPR [business property relief], we fully understand their concerns.
“It’s why we’ll be supporting the NFU’s calls for a pause in the implementation of the policy, while a full consultation is carried out.”
I can't see Labour backing down on this one, but as the pressure increases it's possible that some of their newly elected MPs in rural seats will start to question the policy.
Wednesday, January 22, 2025
Trump fanboys see share prices rise after inauguration
Well the conversion of the big Tech companies to the cause has gone very well for them. Political alliances are already seeing US-based businesses step further into the limelight, with Elon Musk in particular a regular face - and voice - throughout Trump’s campaign but it’s not just Musk who has been involved, with former White House chief strategist labelling the Tesla boss, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg “supplicants” who “surrendered” to the incoming president.
The paper takes a look at the so-called Magnificent Seven - Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta, Microsoft, Nvidia and Tesla - whose growth has fuelled the stock market rise across the Atlantic over the past two years, how their share prices have performed in the week up to Trump’s presidency and what happens next as the stock markets reopen after Martin Luther King Jr Day.
Alphabet, the company formerly known as Google has seen almost a 16 per cent rise in share price from when Trump was confirmed.
A 13 per cent rise for Amazon since Trump’s victory has been added to by a more short-term, but still notable, rise of 3.2 per cent in the week before he takes office.
Meta which donated $1m to Trump’s inaugural fund has seen its share price rise by seven per cent since the vote came in and flat across the last week ahead of Trump’s arrival. The company remains flat ahead of Tuesday trading, up 0.1 per cent.
Microsoft shares are up four per cent since decision day and 2.4 per cent in the past week.
The biggest winner in share price terms since Trump claimed election victory, however, is Musk-led vehicle manufacturer, Tesla.
A share price of $251 on 5 November 2024 has ballooned to $426 at close of play on 17 January - a massive 69 per cent share price increase in under three months, leaving Tesla’s market capitalisation value at almost $1.4tn (£1.14tn).
The Independent adds that even in the past week, the price is up more than three per cent.
Only Apple and Nvidia are failing to show a notable boost in share price since Trump was confirmed. Quite an interesting outcome. I wonder if other businesses will benefit as well.
The Independent adds that even in the past week, the price is up more than three per cent.
Only Apple and Nvidia are failing to show a notable boost in share price since Trump was confirmed. Quite an interesting outcome. I wonder if other businesses will benefit as well.
Tuesday, January 21, 2025
Is Trump set to get his revenge on Labour?
It is being suggested in a great many circles that one of the ways Trump will hit back is by refusing to accept the credentials of Peter Mandelson as the UK ambassador to the United States. The latest view on this in the Independent is that Trump is still threatening to reject Mandelson’s appointment unless the British government accept serious restrictions on his activities.
The paper says that Starmer is being placed under increasing pressure by the incoming Trump administration to bow to the undiplomatic demands or face a humiliating and unprecedented veto on his pick for envoy to Washington:
The Independent revealed over the weekend that Trump was considering the highly unusual move of rejecting Lord Mandelson’s credentials. No British ambassador in Washington or US ambassador in London has ever been refused in such a manner.
The biggest concern remains over Lord Mandelson’s support for close ties with China, fuelled by the UK Labour government being perceived as wooing Beijing following chancellor Rachel Reeves’ recent trip.
One Mar-a-Lago source told The Independent: “It seems that the Starmer government is trying to play a game where it sets China up as a fall back for a relationship with the US. Nobody is buying that here. It’s completely ridiculous but compromises the British government.”
Meanwhile, Downing Street has denied claims that there are splits among senior advisers in regards to Mandelson’s appointment among Sir Keir’s senior advisers.
It had been suggestd that chief of staff Morgan McSweeney had pushed the appointment and national security adviser Jonathan Powell had questioned it. But a senior Downing Street source this was “absolutely not” true.
Nevertheless, the UK embassy in Washington appear to be aware of the concerns regarding the Labour former European commissioner and cabinet minister.
Current UK ambassador Dame Karen Pierce surprised many by attending an inauguration party held by UK and US rightwing politicians on Friday evening. The Independent was told she was a late addition at her request and she was heard asking a number of guests what they thought of the appointment of Mandelson to replace her.
Her appearance also gave rise to speculation that she had attended to prevent Mandelson from going, because current and future ambassadors cannot attend the same event under protocol rules.
Lord Mandelson had been invited in an effort to allow him to meet some of Trump’s trusted inner circle and help build relations.
Trump’s inner circle have acknowledged that a rejection of Mandelson’s credentials would be “a humiliation” for the UK prime minister, who was not invited to the inauguration even though Trump has broken tradition by inviting several other foreign heads of government.
The row is linked to a wider context of strained relations between Sir Keir’s government and the incoming Trump administration, dating back to Labour sending 100 activists to help his Democratic rival Kamala Harris campaign during the presidential election.
Trump’s ally, tech billionaire Elon Musk, has also stoked a barage of social media criticism against Sir Keir and his government over the far-right riots in the UK last summer and jailed activist Tommy Robinson. There are claims in the US that Sir Keir and his government are “anti free speech”.
Given that the UK has already severed its close relationship with Europe, to lose the United States as well will leave us completely isolated. Let's hope that doesnt happen.
Monday, January 20, 2025
An alarming decline in Welsh nature
The paper says that Labour ministers have been accused of overseeing “delays, undelivered commitments and missed deadlines” by the Senedd’s cross-party climate change, environment and infrastructure committee, with one in six Welsh species threatened with extinction:
The Welsh parliament committee called on the government to publish firm proposals for how it intended to save nature, saying it currently lacked “a plan, action and investment”.
Conservation organisations who gave evidence to an inquiry set up by the committee said beloved species such as the curlew, which holds a cherished place in Welsh folklore and culture, were in danger because of a lack of effective action.
In June 2021, the Welsh government promised to set legally binding biodiversity targets, but it admitted to the committee that these targets were now unlikely to be set until 2029. The committee said England had already set its targets and Scotland was ahead of Wales in the process.
The committee found that important documents meant to guide the Welsh government’s biodiversity work, such as the natural resources policy (NRP), which sets out priorities and risks, were years out of date. The NRP was published in 2018.
Llŷr Gruffydd, the committee chair, said: “Wales’s nature is disappearing at an alarming rate. After decades of pollution, urbanisation and the impact of climate change, Wales’s nature is in trouble. One in six Welsh species are threatened with extinction.
“The unfortunate reality is that the Welsh government’s numerous plans, strategies and policies have failed to halt this decline. It’s clear that this is because there has been little investment or action to make good on promises.”
The report said the environmental regulator, Natural Resources Wales, was already understaffed – and was planning to shed another 265 jobs because of budget cuts. It said: “Years of under-investment have stretched NRW too thin, and this has clearly limited its ability to lead biodiversity recovery effectively.”
NRW is responsible for monitoring protected sites but the committee said some had not been visited for more than 10 years.
RSPB Cymru welcomed the report, particularly a recommendation that a forthcoming bill should include a headline target to reverse biodiversity loss.
Examples of species it highlighted as being in deep trouble were the swift, whose numbers in Wales were down 76% since 1995. It said Wales had lost more than 90% of its curlews in the last 40 years. The charity said more than half the world’s manx shearwaters breed on Welsh islands, meaning effective plans to protect marine environments were vital.
After twenty five and a half years in charge, one would have thought that Labour might have grasped the problem by now and was in the process of putting in place measures to deal with it. This report says otherwise.
Sunday, January 19, 2025
Rwanda scheme ICT costs revealed
The Guardian reports that the Conservative government spent more than £130m on IT and data systems for the scheme, which will never be used.
The paper adds that digital tools needed to put the forced removal programme into effect made up the second-largest chunk of the £715m spent in little over two years, behind only the £290m handed directly to Paul Kagame’s government:
They included a database for anticipated complaints to a “monitoring committee”, which was set up to oversee the deal’s compliance with human rights laws, and systems to enforce the Tories’ attempted legal duty to remove asylum seekers arriving on small boats.
Labour announced that it was scrapping the policy shortly after winning the general election, with home secretary Yvette Cooper calling it “the most shocking waste of taxpayers’ money I have ever seen”.
A Home Office official said data protection laws had caused spending to increase and new systems were needed to send Rwandan authorities biometric information, such as fingerprints.
“The Home Office had to deploy people and technology to Rwanda so that they were compliant with data protection,” the civil servant added.
“If people were sent to Rwanda and had an appeal going, the system meant they would have to wait for the decision while in Rwanda.
“If their appeal was successful, they would have been flown back to the UK, so part of those costs was setting up the IT infrastructure to get them visas and transport to come back.”
The £134m spending on IT programmes was not disclosed as part of a breakdown of spending released by the Labour government last month because it was grouped with a wider £280m pool of “other fixed costs”.
A detailed breakdown obtained by the Observer under freedom of information laws shows that £87m was also spent on staff working directly on the Rwanda scheme who have since been redeployed to other tasks.
A further £57m spent since 2022 was classed as “programme and legal costs”, which covers the court battle that culminated in Supreme Court judges declaring the Rwanda scheme unlawful in 2023, as well as the Home Office’s fight against individual challenges brought by selected asylum seekers. The Home Office source said it paid for both government legal department lawyers and external counsel, adding: “Some were solicitors crafting those agreements [with Rwanda] or dealing with legal challenges, and a few were barristers instructed in judicial reviews or appeals.
“The Home Office basically appealed every ruling against them, so the costs went up and up.”
The category also includes spending on setting up the Conservatives’ wider “new plan for immigration”, which saw external consultants hired to help plan and design the programme.
The Home Office source said the plan was organised into many “projects”, each assigned several staff.
“The law was poorly written and difficult to implement,” they added. “It required a lot of policy people hired for these jobs – mostly consultants or people on temporary promotions.”
Previously disclosed spending on the Rwanda scheme included £95m on increasing capacity in immigration detention centres, which were not large enough to hold the number of asylum seekers the Conservatives wanted to force on flights to Kigali.
An attempted flight in June 2022, and planning and preparing for further flights, cost £50m.
With that sort of profligacy, it is little wonder that new government inherited a financial black hole.
Saturday, January 18, 2025
Tories in disarray as Badenoch wings it on pensions
The paper says that the Conservative leader suggested she could back a major policy shift away from the universal promise introduced by the Liberal Democrats when in coalition with her party that the state pension will rise each year by whichever is highest out of 2.5%, inflation, or earnings:
When asked during an LBC phone-in whether she would look at the triple lock, Badenoch said: “We’re going to look at means testing. Means testing is something which we don’t do properly here.”
However, she criticised the Labour government’s move to means-test the winter fuel payment, saying it meant “people who are actually on the breadline actually have had their winter fuel payment taken away”.
Ros Altmann, a non-affiliated peer who previously sat as a Conservative pensions minister, told Sky News on Friday that Badenoch needed to reconsider her comments. “What we urgently need is clarification of what on earth she means,” Altmann said. “What does she mean by means testing the triple lock?”
She added: “The problem we have in going down the route implied – and I don’t think she probably means it – is that every pensioner would start getting a different state pension again. Whereas the whole point of state pension reforms is that there should be a basic flat rate minimum state pension and then encourage people to top it up with private pensions.
“As soon as you introduce means testing to the state pension system, you disincentivise from bothering to save in their private pension.”
One does get the impression that Badenoch is making this sort of thing up as she goes along, which makes her remarks even more damaging for the Tories. There is certainly a need to reform the state pension system so that every pensioner gets a single payment comparable to the minimum wage, but this is not the way to do it.
As one paper pointed out, what makes it worse is that by the time of the next General Election it is possible that about a third of those pensioners who voted Tory last year may no longer be with us, while a large proportion of more conservative, younger voters are being sucked into voting Reform. Badenoch cannot afford to alienate pensioners.
Friday, January 17, 2025
A looming trade war?
The paper says that Reynolds admitted that Trump’s presidency will be a “challenging time for anyone responsible for trade”, amid fears of a global trade war:
In the run-up to his election, the Republican promised to implement 10 to 20 per cent tariffs on all goods coming into the country – a figure that rises to 60 per cent for those from China.
Asked about his incoming presidency, Mr Reynolds told Sky News: “I think it’s going to be a challenging time for anyone who is responsible for trade in a big economy because of some of those pledges that were made in the campaign.”
But he added that there are also “opportunities for the UK”, insisting there are lots of things he would “like to see the UK doing more closely with the US in areas like
“If there’s an offer from the US to talk about how we can collaborate closer together on that, of course we would take a look”, the business secretary said.
Asked if he is worried about the threat of tariffs, Mr Reynolds said: “I am, because the UK is a very globally orientated economy, so the danger to the UK is actually greater than some comparable countries.
“So a lot of our work has been preparing for that, engaging early with the new administration.”
He added that the UK is in a “different position” to the EU and China, as the US doesn’t have such large trade deficits with Britain. But, he added, “we can’t be complacent, and we’re very well prepared”.
Elsewhere in the Independent, Ed Davey has urged Sir Keir Starmer to negotiate a UK-EU customs union to “turbocharge the economy” and strengthen the UK’s hand against possible tariffs from president-elect Donald Trump.
Giving a speech in London on Thursday, the Liberal Democrat leader will say such a deal would help the UK to negotiate with Mr Trump “from a position of strength”.
He will also criticise Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch for wanting to go “cap in hand” to the new US president and “beg for whatever trade deal he’ll give us”, as well as taking a swipe at Reform UK leader Nigel Farage for “fawning over Trump and licking his boots”.
Mr Farage is “more interested in advancing Trump’s agenda over here than the UK’s interests over there”, Sir Ed is expected to tell an audience in London in his first major speech of the year.
Ed Davey is right of course. The UK is not strong enough to stand alone against a protectionist USA. Only the EU has that sort of clout.
Thursday, January 16, 2025
The past continues to haunt the UK's anti-corruption ministers
The Independent reports that the Treasury has become embroiled in a new row with questions mounting over the appointment of Emma Reynolds as minister, who previously lobbied on behalf of Chinese interests.
The paper says that until last year’s election, Reynolds served as managing director at banking trade group TheCityUK, a role which saw her lobby ministers to water down proposed restrictions on Chinese business activity. She also served as the Treasurer for the All Party Parliamentary Group on China.
They add that last month, sources told Bloomberg that Reynolds had campaigned to keep China off the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme’s “enhanced tier”, a categorisation which would have increased transparency obligations for dealings with Beijing, though Labour said Ms Reynolds “was not involved in the government’s China policy”:
The row over her Chinese links comes just weeks after Beijing was accused of spying on the Royal family and days after chancellor Rachel Reeves was heavily criticised for visting China.
Pressed on whether Ms Reynolds would make any decisions on China – the world’s second largest economy - in her new role, the prime minister’s official spokesperson repeatedly refused to say.
“The declaration process for ministers has been followed in the usual way… I’m not getting into the established process for declarations”, the spokesperson said.
The official was repeatedly pressed on whether Ms Reynolds has recused herself from making decisions on Beijing, but declined to provide an answer.
The PM’s official spokesperson denied that failing to answer the question demonstrated a lack of transparency, saying: “This government has strengthened the powers of the independent adviser. We’ve increased the regularity of transparency publications”, insisting that details on Ms Reynolds’ appointment will be published in the usual way.
It seems that Starmer can't catch a break.
Wednesday, January 15, 2025
Have cyber criminals been swindling taxpayers?
The paper says that Dan Jarvis has suggested that hostile actors could have extorted thousands from organisations like the NHS without the Government knowing because there is no mandatory reporting regime.
Now the Home Office has launched a consultation on how to crack down on ransomware, with plans under consideration to ban all public sector bodies from making any payments:
Proposals also include a mandatory reporting regime and payment prevention system, designed to increase the National Crime Agency’s awareness of live attacks and block payments to known criminal groups and sanctioned entities.
Speaking to broadcasters on Tuesday’s morning media round, Mr Jarvis said cyber criminals based in countries like Russia are “quite literally holding our country to ransom” and warned the problem was “extensive.”
Asked how much public bodies had paid out in recent years, Mr Jarvis said “significant” sums had been handed over, telling Times Radio: “Millions of pounds have been paid.
“It’s a huge problem internationally.”
On how much the NHS had given, Mr Jarvis said: “The truth of the matter is we don’t know the precise figures, because there isn’t a mandatory reporting regime.”
Asked whether that meant that a trust could have paid out thousands of pounds to criminals to get its computers back without the Government knowing about it, he said: “In theory, that is the case, and that’s why we’re looking to change the law to bring in a mandatory reporting regime so we’ve got much more visibility of these kind of activities.
“But fundamentally, this is about putting measures in place that will ensure that we are much less vulnerable to these attacks in the future.
“We are working internationally with our allies as well, but these cyber criminals are incredibly devious in the tactics that they use, but it is the wrong approach for public sector authorities to actually pay these ransoms, because… there’s absolutely no guarantee even if they were to pay the ransom, they get the information that they require.”
Internet fraud is a massive concern, but if the government doesnt know if it has been a victim then how are they going to stop it in future?
Tuesday, January 14, 2025
An online conspiracy?
The paper claims that Cummings is helping Musk in his aggressive attacks on Keir Starmer and the Labour government:
The pair, who are both fiercely anti-establishment, are said to be scheming on WhatsApp to derail politics in the UK, according to unconfirmed reports in the Mail on Sunday. Sources told the newspaper that Mr Cummings has been fuelling Mr Musks’s attacks calling for Mr Starmer to be removed as PM and thrown in jail in relation to the grooming gangs scandal.
Mr Cummings, Boris Johnson’s former aide, is also reportedly advising Mr Musk - soon to be Donald Trump's government efficiency tsar - in his bid to cut trillions of pounds of government spending in the US. He has been increasingly engaging with the tech billionaire on X/Twitter - including reposting Mr Musk's posts to his own account.
An ally of Mr Musk told the Mail on Sunday: “It is 100% true that they [Musk and Cummings] are talking about smaller government and the end of the traditional party system. It is not just Elon – Dom is in constant contact with major Silicon Valley figures, who are becoming increasingly anti-woke.”
Mr Cummings, who was embroiled in a scandal over his infamous trip to Barnard Castle during lockdown, is planning a new ‘StartUp Party’ to challenge the status quo in Westminster.
Fears over Mr Musk’s interference in UK politics increased last week after reports emerged that he was looking at ways to replace Keir Starmer as Prime Minister. Sources told the Financial Times Mr Musk believes that “western civilisation itself is threatened” and is examining how he can destabilise the Labour government beyond his aggressive X posts.
The Mirror revealed last week that Mr Musk’s tweets were being monitored by counter-extremism officials at the Home Office’s Homeland Security Group.
It will be interesting to see if being a US government official will slow Musk down in anyway. If he doesnt then the Prime Minister really will have to make official complaints.
Monday, January 13, 2025
Will Reeves be forced to break her own fiscal rules?
She says that last week’s market moves, which drove 30-year gilt yields to their highest level since 1998, probably had more to do with the chaos to come in the US than Reeves’s budget plans, but whatever the cause, if it is sustained, the jump in yields will push up the interest bill on the government’s vast debt pile, and that would jeopardise Reeves’s hopes of meeting her fiscal rules:
Mark Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, once warned that the UK was “reliant on the kindness of strangers” (specifically foreign investors) to fund its deficits – and therefore subject to the whims of the markets. It is all the more true post-pandemic, given the sharp surge in government debt.
When the mood of those strangers swings against the government, it is hard to ignore. Some analysts even fear investors may be influenced at the margins by Elon Musk’s obsession with what he seems to think is the dire state of the UK.
Take all this into account, and imposing a tougher spending squeeze on Whitehall departments in the later years of the upcoming spending review than Reeves sketched out in the autumn may seem a reasonable response. It is certainly the one government officials have been pointing to, alongside dark hints about the benefits bill and the need for public sector pay restraint.
Yet as the Resolution Foundation pointed out on Friday, kneejerk spending cuts are not just digits on a spreadsheet but will have material implications (see last year’s decision to scrap the winter fuel allowance for the vast majority of pensioners – also made with fretful markets in mind).
The thinktank warned Reeves against “taking permanent and concrete policy decisions with real-life impacts on households, in reaction to bond market movements that may turn out to be temporary”, urging her to “keep calm and carry on” until the autumn budget.
Doing nothing at all could rile the gods of the bond markets – risky for any chancellor, as Kwasi Kwarteng can attest.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies has pointed out that the projections for the final years of the spending review period already look eye-wateringly tight, with growth of only 1.3% a year pencilled in after 2025-26. The margin for error is very narrow indeed.
Labour went into the election promising not to raise taxes. At the same time, public services are approaching crisis point and desperately need new investment.
Unless economic growth picks up, Reeves is going to find herself caught between a rock and a hard place. Will she be forced to cut spending, or will she break her election promise once again and put up taxes? It isn't a very comfortable place to be in.
Unless economic growth picks up, Reeves is going to find herself caught between a rock and a hard place. Will she be forced to cut spending, or will she break her election promise once again and put up taxes? It isn't a very comfortable place to be in.
Sunday, January 12, 2025
Pruning the money tree
The paper says that they have been been told that talks on further tightening rules on MPs’ outside interests, including media contracts, will be started by leader of the House of Commons, Lucy Powell, at a hearing of the all-party standards committee on Tuesday:
Current and former MPs, including Reform UK’s Lee Anderson and the Conservative former MP and minister Jacob Rees-Mogg, have pulled in six-figure sums as regular presenters on GB News while having seats in the House of Commons. Reform’s leader, Nigel Farage, is also receiving large sums from the channel.
Anderson has listed income of £100,000 a year for eight hours a week for his on-screen work from 1 March 2023, while Rees-Mogg registered well over £300,000 a year for his role as a presenter between February 2023 and March 2024 before he lost his North East Somerset seat at last July’s general election.
David Lammy, now the foreign secretary, topped Labour’s list of highest paid MPs in opposition with additional income of £243,800 between 2019 and 2023. This included £99,300 from his regular radio show on LBC.
In its first few weeks in office, the government tightened the rules on MPs’ outside interests so they would no longer be able to be paid for giving advice on public policy or guidance on how parliament works.
But many MPs, whose salary is now £91,346 a year plus expenses, have still been able to bring in large amounts of extra income. Now ministers are keen to gain cross-party agreement in committee on plans to limit media and other earnings before putting the ideas before the House of Commons.
In December Nigel Farage, who became MP for Clacton last July, was paid £189,300 for working an estimated four hours a month as “brand ambassador” for a gold bullion company in addition to receiving £98,000 a month as a GB News presenter. After winning the election, the government set up the all-party modernisation committee to look at how to improve standards and working practices, and to make the Commons more effective. It is now working with the standards committee to examine ideas on reform.
Speaking to the Observer before this week’s meeting, Powell said: “Trust in politics is depressingly low, as people see parliament as remote and out of touch. The last parliament was one of the worst on record for standards – to the detriment of us all. We were elected on a manifesto commitment to put politics back to service.
This move is to be welcomed. MPs are elected to represent their constituents not to use their position to supplement their income from lucrative outside gigs, that can often be perceived as a conflict of interest.
Saturday, January 11, 2025
Reform MPs profiting from posting on Twitter
The papeer says that Farage, Anderson and Rupert Lowe MP have all declared thousands in payments from the company in their recent parliamentary register of interests, via billionaire Musk’s ‘Creator’ revenue programme:
The scheme allows premium users with more than 500 verified followers to ‘monetise’ their accounts on the controversial site, which has grown increasingly toxic since it was taken over by the Tesla tycoon in 2022.
More than £10,000 has been paid to the right-wing trio since July last year, with Mr Farage having earned the most so far, according to parliamentary filings. The Clacton-on-Sea MP, who has 2.2m followers, has made in excess of £5,000 since entering the scheme.
A Labour source told The Independent: “We’ve always known that - for every person who spreads hateful rhetoric on X because they want to divide our society - there is another set of grifters who do it just to make money. It looks like these Reform MPs fall in both categories, and no-one will be in the least bit surprised.”
Carla Denyer, MP for Bristol Central and Green Party co-leader, said the profits mark an “unholy alliance” between the right-wing and Elon Musk.
“The fact that Reform MPs are profiting financially from posting on Musk’s X tells us all we need to know about how genuine their motives are,” she said.
“Neither Musk nor Farage have ordinary people’s interests at heart. They don’t want to make people’s lives better, and they don’t value our democracy. They want to strip away protections for workers to make it easier for them and their super-rich buddies to make money, and don’t care what damage they do to our communities in the process.”
The paper adds that a former X/Twitter curator, who worked for the organisation for seven years, has warned of the dangers of monetising content:
Writing for this publication, Marc Burrows said: “Unlike traditional media, where editorial standards might temper the most inflammatory content, X’s monetisation strategy actively incentivises division.
“The more outraged people are, the more they engage. The more they engage, the more the poster earns. Truth, accuracy and adding value to public discourse are secondary concerns. This is about generating heat rather than light.”
The former curator, who left his post a month before Mr Musk arrived in protest, added: “By monetising outrage, X has created a self-perpetuating ecosystem where inflammatory content rises to the top, dragging political discourse ever further toward the extremes.”
This is how far this site has sunk.
Friday, January 10, 2025
Fantasy economics is back
The paper says that the former prime minister’s lawyers have said the remarks - made since the lead-up to the general election - are likely to “cause serious harm to her reputation”, claiming they are “false and defamatory”.
The paper adds that the former Prime Minister's lawyers also suggest that assertions made by the Labour leader before the July general election contributed to Ms Truss losing her South West Norfolk seat:
Sir Keir has repeatedly claimed the former prime minister crashed the economy, referring to the weeks after her 2022 mini-budget which sparked gilt market freefall and a run on sterling after she introduced unfunded tax cuts.
The letter, originally seen by the Telegraph, argues that the fallout did not amount to an economic crash, since there was no fall in economic output or rise in unemployment.
It's difficult to know where to start in writing about this letter, however as one lawyer tweeted, 'in six pages of calling Starmer's remarks about Truss crashing the economy "defamatory", Truss's lawyers never once threaten proceedings if he doesn't comply. It doesn't suggest confidence in their position.'
He goes on: 'All the more remarkable becuase the letter says the statement *is* false and defamatory, and *has already* caused her damage. If that's right, isn't the right response to seek a remedy (even if just an apology)? Suspect the lawyers have privately advised suing would be hopeless.'
Truss practised fantasy economics as Prime Minister, now she is practising fantasy politics. What did she think she was getting into when she stood for Parliament?
Sir Keir has repeatedly claimed the former prime minister crashed the economy, referring to the weeks after her 2022 mini-budget which sparked gilt market freefall and a run on sterling after she introduced unfunded tax cuts.
The letter, originally seen by the Telegraph, argues that the fallout did not amount to an economic crash, since there was no fall in economic output or rise in unemployment.
It's difficult to know where to start in writing about this letter, however as one lawyer tweeted, 'in six pages of calling Starmer's remarks about Truss crashing the economy "defamatory", Truss's lawyers never once threaten proceedings if he doesn't comply. It doesn't suggest confidence in their position.'
He goes on: 'All the more remarkable becuase the letter says the statement *is* false and defamatory, and *has already* caused her damage. If that's right, isn't the right response to seek a remedy (even if just an apology)? Suspect the lawyers have privately advised suing would be hopeless.'
Truss practised fantasy economics as Prime Minister, now she is practising fantasy politics. What did she think she was getting into when she stood for Parliament?
Thursday, January 09, 2025
Is Facebook embracing a new right wing agenda?
The paper says that on Tuesday morning, Meta disbanded Facebook and Instagram’s third-party factchecking program and will recommend more political content across its social networks, as its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg attempts to curry favor with Donald Trump’s incoming administration:
“Recent elections also feel like a cultural tipping point towards once again prioritizing speech,” he said in a video posted on Instagram. “Factcheckers have just been too politically biased.”
Notes from everyday users will replace corrections from vetted factchecking partners, similar to Twitter/X’s Community Notes feature. In a post on Threads, Meta’s answer to X, Zuckerberg also vowed to reduce “censorship mistakes”, rhetoric that mirrors US conservatives’ longstanding charges that Facebook and Instagram unfairly penalize conservatives, for which there is little evidence. He lambasted coverage of Trump by “legacy media, which has pushed to censor more and more” and said that his own company’s previous content moderation policies resulted in “too much censorship” and had “gone too far”.
Trump immediately welcomed the changes. Asked if Zuckerberg was making so many rapid changes in response to invective from Trump – the president-elect threatened the CEO with “life in prison” in August – Trump said: “Probably. Yeah. Probably.” Trump told Fox News that Meta had “come a long way” and that its “presentation was excellent”.
The night before, Meta announced the appointment of Dana White, CEO of Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), the de facto sport of the Maga movement, to its board. White has backed Trump since 2016.
The departure of Nick Clegg, has seen Meta's most prominent conservative appointed to its top policy job. Joel Kaplan is a former deputy chief of staff to the Republican US president George W Bush, who has championed conservative causes inside and outside Meta:
Within, he has pushed Meta to partner with rightwing news websites on factchecking; placed prominent Republicans in key roles; and advocated for Facebook not to restrict fake news, arguing such a crackdown would unfairly penalize conservatives. Without, he championed the nomination of the conservative justice Brett Kavanaugh to the US supreme court. When Kavanaugh was called to testify about allegations of sexual assault, Kaplan sat behind him, visible on the aisle seat of the Senate chamber.
Meta – not Zuckerberg personally – donated $1m to Trump’s inaugural fund, as have a host of tech leaders. The CEO did dine with Trump at Mar-a-Lago two weeks ago and gifted him a pair of Meta Ray-Bans, the company’s camera-equipped glasses.
Meta’s most well-connected Democrat, Sheryl Sandberg, is no longer its chief operating officer nor even on its board. Zuckerberg has replaced her with White. Where Sheryl Sandberg wrote the manual for white-collar feminism, Lean In, White was filmed slapping his wife at a party in 2022 after she slapped him.
The paper adds that Zuckerberg’s moves mirror steps Elon Musk, who gave about $200m to elect Trump, has taken in his haphazard management of X:
Musk likewise dispensed with any third-party factchecking on X in favor of elevating Community Notes, though there was less there to begin with than on Facebook, Instagram and Threads.
“In a shift driven largely by Trump ally and X-owner Elon Musk, third-party factchecking has gone out of fashion among social executives. Social platforms have become more political and polarized, as misinformation has become a buzzword that encompasses everything from outright lies to viewpoints people disagree with,” said the eMarketer principal Jasmine Enberg.
Zuckerberg’s plays for approval from conservatives may spook liberals and even advertisers if Facebook and Instagram’s brand safety declines. They are ultimately unlikely to hurt Meta’s bottom line, though, she said. “Meta’s massive size and powerhouse ad platform insulate it somewhat from an X-like user and advertiser exodus. But any major drop-off in engagement could hurt Meta’s ad business, given the intense competition for users and ad dollars,” she said.
In announcing the dissolution of Facebook and Instagram’s factchecking, Zuckerberg said he would likewise shunt Meta’s content moderation teams from the Golden state to the Lone Star state. The CEO said the change of location would “help remove the concern that biased employees are overly censoring content”. Musk moved X’s headquarters to Texas from California, as he has done with SpaceX and Tesla.
Zuckerberg believes that Trump is dictating the terms of mainstream discourse in 2025. The CEO wrote that Meta would “remove restrictions on topics like immigration and gender that are out of touch with mainstream discourse”. Immigration and gender – two of Trump’s main campaign issues, harped on about again and again at his speeches. A dozen years ago, Zuckerberg wrote that immigration was vital to the US’s white-collar economy as he founded an organization to facilitate more of it, aligning with thrust of Barack Obama’s policies with the help of Sandberg.
If one state is biased, so is its replacement. Facebook and Instagram are so large that their terms of service in effect set the Overton window for online conversation across the world. That window has moved to the political right. The politics and laws of the state California allows people obtaining driver’s licenses to choose a non-binary option for their gender, X. Texas, by contrast, bans gender-affirming care for transgender minors. California’s governor has vowed to defend healthcare providers performing out-of-state abortions. Texas instituted a six-week abortion ban in 2021 before Roe v Wade was overturned. The laws and politics of the state will in part determine the acceptable range of discussion on Facebook and Instagram.
The future looks bleak for social media as the right wing in the States seeks to use it to spread its agenda to the rest of the world.
Wednesday, January 08, 2025
Divide and conquer - Jenrick playing dangerous games
The paper says that Jenrick was challenged repeatedly on Tuesday morning for having failed to act on the outcome of an inquiry into grooming gangs while he was in the Home Office, despite now demanding one, and for rarely mentioning the issue in the House of Commons until this year:
Badenoch had previously defended the shadow justice secretary’s right to make the comments, which have caused private disquiet among some Conservative MPs.
“What I have said is that millions of people have come into our country in recent times, but some of them are coming from countries and cultures that have backwards attitudes to women,” Jenrick told Times Radio. “And that’s backed up by the evidence that we have seen from the Jay report and the testimonies of the victims.
“Pakistani men are over-represented in those who are involved in the grooming gangs, and the evidence we have seen is that some of those have specifically preyed upon white, working-class girls because they viewed them as worthless.”
Prof Alexis Jay’s independent inquiry into child sexual abuse did not conclusively find there was an over-representation of Pakistani men, saying it found a lack of data which meant it was “impossible to know whether any particular ethnic group is over-represented as perpetrators of child sexual exploitation by networks”.
The Liberal Democrat deputy leader, Daisy Cooper, said: “Robert Jenrick’s attempt to exploit this appalling scandal for his own political gain is completely shameless. He didn’t lift a finger to help the victims when a minister, now he’s jumping on the bandwagon and acting like a pound shop Farage.
“Kemi Badenoch should sack him as shadow justice secretary and condemn his divisive comments, instead of letting him run a leadership campaign under her nose.”
As serious as this issue is, my party's reaction to this, as with other issues, is becoming rather predictable. They call for people to resign so often that they are devaluing the response and undermining their own case. And this time a call for resignation is actually justified. But what is Jenrick up to?
Well, the Guardian also reports that Tory insiders have privately accused Robert Jenrick of stoking divisions to fuel his own leadership ambitions.
One senior Conservative MP and Badenoch leadership supporter said: “Many in the Conservative party are worried that Jenrick is using the issue of grooming gangs for his own leadership ambitions. Painting a whole culture as alien is nothing short of xenophobic, and undermines the important issue of achieving justice for those poor girls who were let down by so many.
“He is busying toxifying the Conservative brand while [the Reform party leader] Nigel Farage is looking like the reasonable one. All because Kemi has failed to rein him in.”
One former Conservative colleague of Jenrick said he was “poisoning the discourse which could damage a very pertinent and important cause”. Another Tory MP described Jenrick’s morning interviews as a disgrace.
This attempt by Jenrick to carve a constituency for himself is dangerous and irresponsible. A previous Tory leader sacked Enoch Powell when he did something similar, Badenoch should follow suit with her maverick spokesperson and she should do it immediately.
Tuesday, January 07, 2025
Exodus
The paper says that the last year saw the biggest outflow of companies from the London Stock Exchange since the global financial crisis.
They add that according to accountants EY, eighty-eight companies including Paddy Power owner Flutter, travel group Tui and Just Eat abandoned the London market for US and European exchanges.
This comes amid fears of the capital’s shrinking relevance as a place to do business following Britain’s exit from the European Union:
Last month, former London Stock Exchange boss Xavier Rolet said there is a “real threat” that more UK companies will move their listings to America as trading thins out in London and grows over there.
The loss of 88 firms is the most since 2009, said EY. During the same period there were 18 new listings. where companies first sell shares to the public.
The shrinkage of London as a global market has been steady. Twenty years ago, when banks, manufacturers, oil companies and pharmaceutical firms dominated lists of biggest companies, UK-listed stocks accounted for 11 per cent of the global market. Now it is about 4 per cent.
The trend is as much about America’s growth as it is about London’s shrinkage as the US and its giant tech stocks have dominated world markets.
The entire FTSE 100 index of top UK-listed companies including household names Tesco, HSBC, Shell and British Airways owner IAG are together worth about £2 trillion.
By comparison, New York-listed Apple alone has grown to be worth $3.72 trillion (£2.97 trillion).
The next-biggest companies in New York which help the US market swamp all competition are all tech firms worth more than $1 trillion, including Amazon, Tesla, Microsoft, Meta, Google owner Alphabet, and Nvidia.
No London-listed company is worth more than £165bn, or a few per cent of Apple’s size.
Largely this shows that to compete, a stock exchange needs big tech companies. Britain grows a few, but the biggest example, chip designer ARM, chose New York to have its shares listed in 2023 when its owner SoftBank sold out.
Does this matter? Companies tend to want to be close to their shareholders, which could lure more companies away from Britain wholesale costing jobs and tax revenue if they change where their shares are listed, said Professor David Bailey of the University of Birmingham.
If London shrinks, it could also have an effect on its broader attractiveness as a place to raise money.
“Ultimately if London isn’t seen as an attractive market for bigger companies to list their shares, this raises a question mark over whether UK firms can attract money,” he said.
London also hosts vast debt markets, as well as metals trading markets, a complex insurance market and other services big companies need.
If the central reason for being based in London starts to fade, these other markets could be hurt too.
Another consequence that the Brexiteers need to answer for.
Last month, former London Stock Exchange boss Xavier Rolet said there is a “real threat” that more UK companies will move their listings to America as trading thins out in London and grows over there.
The loss of 88 firms is the most since 2009, said EY. During the same period there were 18 new listings. where companies first sell shares to the public.
The shrinkage of London as a global market has been steady. Twenty years ago, when banks, manufacturers, oil companies and pharmaceutical firms dominated lists of biggest companies, UK-listed stocks accounted for 11 per cent of the global market. Now it is about 4 per cent.
The trend is as much about America’s growth as it is about London’s shrinkage as the US and its giant tech stocks have dominated world markets.
The entire FTSE 100 index of top UK-listed companies including household names Tesco, HSBC, Shell and British Airways owner IAG are together worth about £2 trillion.
By comparison, New York-listed Apple alone has grown to be worth $3.72 trillion (£2.97 trillion).
The next-biggest companies in New York which help the US market swamp all competition are all tech firms worth more than $1 trillion, including Amazon, Tesla, Microsoft, Meta, Google owner Alphabet, and Nvidia.
No London-listed company is worth more than £165bn, or a few per cent of Apple’s size.
Largely this shows that to compete, a stock exchange needs big tech companies. Britain grows a few, but the biggest example, chip designer ARM, chose New York to have its shares listed in 2023 when its owner SoftBank sold out.
Does this matter? Companies tend to want to be close to their shareholders, which could lure more companies away from Britain wholesale costing jobs and tax revenue if they change where their shares are listed, said Professor David Bailey of the University of Birmingham.
If London shrinks, it could also have an effect on its broader attractiveness as a place to raise money.
“Ultimately if London isn’t seen as an attractive market for bigger companies to list their shares, this raises a question mark over whether UK firms can attract money,” he said.
London also hosts vast debt markets, as well as metals trading markets, a complex insurance market and other services big companies need.
If the central reason for being based in London starts to fade, these other markets could be hurt too.
Another consequence that the Brexiteers need to answer for.
