Sunday, April 13, 2025
UK warned on trade concessions
The Independent adds that an adviser to the US president said it would take an “extraordinary deal” for the UK to improve on the 10 per cent tariff Mr Trump has placed on the country.
The paper says that UK ministers appear to be increasingly downbeat about the prospect of a US-UK deal, with health minister Stephen Kinnock admitting that it might take some time, despite officials previously insisting that talks were at an “advanced stage”:
It is understood that there is more appetite and optimism from UK officials to chase lower trade barriers with other countries instead.
It comes after economists on Thursday warned the prime minister he must accelerate cooperation with other leading economies because the US, under Mr Trump, had shown itself to be an unreliable trade partner.
The US president was forced to delay tariffs above his base rate of 10 per cent, which affects the UK, for 90 days, after days of market turmoil that sparked a fire sale of US government bonds. However, he later warned higher rates would return if countries were unable to strike fresh deals with the US.
Asked about hopes the UK could escape the baseline tariff, Mr Evenett warned: “I just haven't seen any signal from [the Trump administration] that they're willing to contemplate that. And the same is true on in the sensitive sectors [for aluminium, steel and cars], getting the tariffs below 25 per cent.”
“[The UK government] is stuck between a rock and a hard place on this stuff…. I think we're probably going to have to resign ourselves to the fact that it's a 10 per cent tariff going forward.”
He also warned that the US could prevent the UK from doing trade deals with other countries as part of an agreement – something he dubbed a “poison pill”.
“There is a risk, if one goes down the road of negotiating something with the US, that they put strings on who the UK can trade with, and this, of course, will all be about decoupling and de-risking from China.
“So I think that if we don’t pay a domestic price in terms of liberalising or deregulating health and safety standards and agriculture [the US] seems to so desperately want, then the price would have to be there.”
The papers also quotes King’s College London economist Jonathan Portes who has warned that any agreement with the US would primarily be a matter of “damage limitation”, rather than offering major upsides.
Are these trade talks already a busted flush? Would we not be better standing up to Trump as Canada has, instead of trying to soft soap him?
Saturday, April 12, 2025
Anger as Labour favour Scunthorpe over Port Talbot
The paper quotes the Prime Minister as stating that the future of the British Steel plant in Scunthorpe "hangs in the balance", as he vowed that the government will "keep all options on the table" amid calls for nationalisation. However, they add that Plaid Cymru has questioned why the government did not intervene to protect Port Talbot steelworks in the same way it is acting over Scunthorpe:
Both the Commons and the Lords will return to Parliament for a rare Saturday sitting to debate a law aimed at securing the future of the plant in North Lincolnshire. Jingye, the Chinese owner of British Steel, plans to close the blast furnaces and switch to a greener form of production.
Speaking from Downing Street, Sir Keir said: "As Prime Minister, I will always act in the national interest to protect British jobs and British workers. This afternoon, the future of British Steel hangs in the balance. Jobs, investment, growth, our economic and national security are all on the line."
He said that while the UK is facing a "new era of global instability", concerns about the plant and talks to protect it have been going on "for years". This moment could have happened at any time, but it has happened now, and I will not stand by. There is no time to waste," he said.
"So we are recalling Parliament tomorrow for a Saturday sitting. We will pass emergency legislation in one day to give the Business Secretary the powers to do everything possible to stop the closure of these blast furnaces. And as I have said, we will keep all options on the table."
However, in response Plaid’s Westminster leader Liz Saville Roberts MP said: “Parliament is being recalled tomorrow to debate the nationalisation of Scunthorpe steelworks.
“But when global market forces devastated Welsh livelihoods in Port Talbot, Labour dismissed Plaid Cymru’s calls for nationalisation as ‘pipe dreams’. In a real emergency, governments step up to defend their strategic interests. Plaid Cymru recognised the importance of Welsh steelmaking. Labour chose to look the other way.
“When it was Wales, they mocked. Now it’s England, they act. Labour has taken Wales for granted for far too long – and the people of Wales won’t forget it.”
As one local journalist tweeted, if steel collapses in Port Talbot, that's market forces, but if it collapses in Scunthorpe then Labour will hold a special Saturday sitting and nationalisation to save their jobs.
It is good news for workers in Lincolnshire, but a slap in the face for those who left behind in Wales.
Friday, April 11, 2025
Councils face big bill from Labour's Barnett gaffe
That means that whereas public bodies in England will receive the full additional amount they need to pay in NI contributons, here in Wales we will just get 5.9% of the extra cost to the Treasury.
It has been estimated that this could create a £65m shortfall, money that will have to come from health, social services or education budgets. Now, according to Wales-on-line, a figure has been put on the cost to local councils.
The website says that the leader of the Welsh Local Government Association believes that Councils in Wales could be left up to £20m short due to the UK Government's decision:
The Welsh Government has already said it thought that Welsh public sector organisations face a £253m due to the changes. Mr Drakeford said the chancellor's decision was "wrong" and went against an advisory document prepared between the two governments.
This major change mid-year and after budgets had been set was frustrating, Andrew Morgan, the leader of Rhondda Cynon Taf council and the Welsh Local Government Association said.
He said it is now up to Welsh Government to decide how to distribute the money the UK Government does give to each public sector organisation. The NHS takes up about half of Welsh Government funding, and councils around a quarter. Cllr Morgan said councils expect only 85% of their National Insurance costs will be met - leaving them 15% short. However, if the Welsh Government fully funded Wales' health boards, the amount left would be less, which would likely mean councils would face an effective 45% shortfall.
He said the working assumption in now that councils could be £20-25m short. Cllr Morgan said that because the Welsh Government received extra money from the UK Government in the budget, councils were better off overall but the communication of the decision had been poor.
"On the one hand I do understand we have the Barnett formula in Wales but it's a well-known fact that we've had a significant amount of cuts to public services over the last decade, but because they have been quite so bad as in England, Wales we do have a slightly bigger public sector workforce and more services are in-house, whereas in England an awful lot have been outsourced.
"Where they've done the calculation formula based on England, that gives us money, but we've always known if they did it that way we would be short, and therefore we're really disappointed they have done it that way. We've encouraged them not to and would have hoped all the way along in the private discussions they were having in the background with the Welsh Fovernment, they would have understood the impact it would have had on Wales.
"It is going to be challenging, but the scale of it does depend. If we end up having 20-25% of that £65m we could have a £20m cost pressure. That would vary depending on the size of the authority. A council the size of RCT would end up with £1.5-£2m shortfall, that's the kind of figure we're looking at.
"Would I like to say it's manageable? No I wouldn't like to say it is," he said. Cllr Morgan said authorities can absorb that, potentially, via in-spend overspends. "But it doesn't come without pain because there are no easy wins now it's often that you're not filling a post. When you're not filling the post of a litter picker, or someone who fills in potholes, then it's the things people see and notice," he said.
"That's the kind of difficult choices, but it all depends very much what does the Welsh Government decides to do, whether they can find some funding from reserves, if that's possible, we're not sure. But the sooner we get clarity, the better, because otherwise local government will have to make in your savings".
This decision is a major gaffe by the UK government and will come back to haunt them in next year's Senedd elections.
It has been estimated that this could create a £65m shortfall, money that will have to come from health, social services or education budgets. Now, according to Wales-on-line, a figure has been put on the cost to local councils.
The website says that the leader of the Welsh Local Government Association believes that Councils in Wales could be left up to £20m short due to the UK Government's decision:
The Welsh Government has already said it thought that Welsh public sector organisations face a £253m due to the changes. Mr Drakeford said the chancellor's decision was "wrong" and went against an advisory document prepared between the two governments.
This major change mid-year and after budgets had been set was frustrating, Andrew Morgan, the leader of Rhondda Cynon Taf council and the Welsh Local Government Association said.
He said it is now up to Welsh Government to decide how to distribute the money the UK Government does give to each public sector organisation. The NHS takes up about half of Welsh Government funding, and councils around a quarter. Cllr Morgan said councils expect only 85% of their National Insurance costs will be met - leaving them 15% short. However, if the Welsh Government fully funded Wales' health boards, the amount left would be less, which would likely mean councils would face an effective 45% shortfall.
He said the working assumption in now that councils could be £20-25m short. Cllr Morgan said that because the Welsh Government received extra money from the UK Government in the budget, councils were better off overall but the communication of the decision had been poor.
"On the one hand I do understand we have the Barnett formula in Wales but it's a well-known fact that we've had a significant amount of cuts to public services over the last decade, but because they have been quite so bad as in England, Wales we do have a slightly bigger public sector workforce and more services are in-house, whereas in England an awful lot have been outsourced.
"Where they've done the calculation formula based on England, that gives us money, but we've always known if they did it that way we would be short, and therefore we're really disappointed they have done it that way. We've encouraged them not to and would have hoped all the way along in the private discussions they were having in the background with the Welsh Fovernment, they would have understood the impact it would have had on Wales.
"It is going to be challenging, but the scale of it does depend. If we end up having 20-25% of that £65m we could have a £20m cost pressure. That would vary depending on the size of the authority. A council the size of RCT would end up with £1.5-£2m shortfall, that's the kind of figure we're looking at.
"Would I like to say it's manageable? No I wouldn't like to say it is," he said. Cllr Morgan said authorities can absorb that, potentially, via in-spend overspends. "But it doesn't come without pain because there are no easy wins now it's often that you're not filling a post. When you're not filling the post of a litter picker, or someone who fills in potholes, then it's the things people see and notice," he said.
"That's the kind of difficult choices, but it all depends very much what does the Welsh Government decides to do, whether they can find some funding from reserves, if that's possible, we're not sure. But the sooner we get clarity, the better, because otherwise local government will have to make in your savings".
This decision is a major gaffe by the UK government and will come back to haunt them in next year's Senedd elections.
Thursday, April 10, 2025
Courting Trump - the quest for relevance
Nevertheless, here he is in the Independent, claiming that his friendship with Donald Trump could help the UK in their tariff negotiations with the US.
The paper says that the Reform UK leader, who has long supported the US president, has previously said he thought the tariffs were “a bit excessive”. And speaking to BBC Breakfast yesterday, Farage hailed his relationship “Not just with President Trump, but half of the cabinet.”
This is desperation at work on Farage's part, an attempt to find some relevance in UK politics.
That is apparent in this article on Nation Cymru, which suggests that opponents of Reform UK believe the party’s Achilles’ heel is its leader Nigel Farage’s close association with Donald Trump:
In the wake of Trump’s announcement of hefty tariffs on goods exported to the United States, many of those with a low opinion of Farage took to social media to draw attention to the links between the two men.
One post on X said: “Less than a month ago, Farage went off to the US to fundraise for Trump. A big reminder that Farage and Reform would ruin the UK economy in the same way as Farage’s best buddy.”
On March 20 the Guardian reported: “Nigel Farage is once again in America helping to fundraise for Donald Trump’s Republican Party, with the latest data showing he has spent more than 800 hours on outside employment since being elected.
“The Reform UK leader is appearing on Thursday night to give a keynote speech at a fundraiser for Florida Republicans’ ‘Disruptors’ dinner, with tables for top-tier ‘Trump sponsors’ costing $25,000 (£19,000).
“Before his appearance, he was absent from Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, and he did not appear in the Commons on Thursday.
“Farage has made at least nine trips abroad, including eight to the US, since he was elected MP for Clacton in Essex last July, with many of them either funded by donors or undertaken for paid employment such as speeches.
“In a statement issued by the US organisers, Farage said: ‘I’m so incredibly excited to be joining the Republican Party of Florida for the Disruptors Dinner.’
“President Trump’s decisive win and return to the White House inspires us all to continue the fight for freedom globally. I’m looking forward to being back in the Free State of Florida to celebrate with all of you.”
In the light of Trump's assault on the world economy, maybe a period of silence on the Reform leader's part is called for.
Wednesday, April 09, 2025
Labour chancellor rejects 'buy British' plea
The paper says that the chancellor and Downing Street said that, despite a campaign from the Liberal Democrats, they would not be calling om Britons to follow Canada, who have launched a buy Canadian campaign in response to a 25% US tariff on Canadian imports:
During Treasury questions on Tuesday, the Lib Dems’ deputy leader and Treasury spokesperson, Daisy Cooper, asked the government to “commit to a ‘buy British’ campaign as part of a broader national effort to encourage people to buy British here at home”.
Reeves replied: “In terms of buying British, I think everyone will make their own decisions. What we don’t want to see is a trade war, with Britain becoming inward-looking, because if every country in the world decided that they only wanted to buy things produced in their country, that is not a good way forward.”
The prime minister’s spokesperson backed Reeves and said there were no plans for the government to launch a buy British campaign. He said the government “will always back British manufacturers” but it was up to individuals to decide what they wanted to buy.
Asked if the government would advise people to avoid US products, he said that would not be consistent with Britain being an “open, trading nation” and the government was “not going to tell people where they buy their stuff”.
He said: “That is something the prime minister and the chancellor have previously said, and we want to see fewer trade barriers around the world, such that we’re continuing to support our economy. At the same time, we also continue to prioritise and support British manufacturers, British producers.
This sort of prevarication sends the wrong message to Trump, that he can walk all over us. We should be right behind Canada and copying their response.
Tuesday, April 08, 2025
Time for UK to step up in response to Trump
The paper says that the intervention comes as the government scrambles to boost support for British businesses and negotiate a trade deal with the US that would give Britain a carve-out to avoid the sweeping tariffs, which have been slapped on all major economies:
The UK should “notch up” its threats of retaliation towards Donald Trump after he imposed 10 per cent tariffs on UK exports, a former ambassador to the US has said.
It comes as the government scrambles to boost support for British businesses and negotiate a trade deal with the US that would give Britain a carve-out to avoid the sweeping tariffs, which have been slapped on all major economies.
While the UK has said nothing is off the table when it comes to responding to the tariffs, Sir Nigel Sheinwald said the UK should have gone further, earlier with its threats.
“I think it's right that we should say we're going to think about retaliation. We might indeed have said that a little bit earlier on”, Sir Nigel told Sky News.
“I think it's always wrong to take that off the table or sound as if you don't mean it, because in the world of trade policy and trade negotiators, this is a tough world where you've got to brandish those weapons and seem as though you're prepared to use them.”
“I think the tempo and the tone need to be notched up somewhat”, he added.
Another former ambassador urged the PM to build a 'coalition of the willing' against Trump's tariffs.
Lord Ricketts told the Independent: “With the level of turbulence and unpredictability off the scale, two priorities stand out. First, move further and faster to draw closer to the EU. Second, just as with the coalition of the willing with Europeans on defence, we need a coalition of like-minded democracies to keep alive a rules-based economic order.”
I think both of these former ambassadors are spot on. Trump is playing hardball and he doesnt respect weakness. If we are going to negotiate he has to understand that we are prepared to retaliate in kind if he doesnt make concessions, otherwise he will walk all over us.
Monday, April 07, 2025
Starmer under pressure for Brexit reset
The paper says that Trade unions, who were previously divided over Brexit and still provide more than half of Labour’s campaign funding, are now at the forefront of a new push for much closer ties with the EU:
Armed with a survey by pollster Peter McLeod – who has carried out research for Labour and the unions – the Trades Union Congress (TUC) has joined with business groups and others to urge Sir Keir to rethink his Brexit red lines.
While the prime minister has insisted he will resist what he calls “a false choice” between the EU and US, the TUC’s public demands are being reflected in private by many in Labour as well.
It follows President Trump imposing a 10 per cent base “reciprocal tariff” on the UK, half of the 20 per cent slapped on the EU. Other countries such as China, South Korea, Japan and Cambodia face tariffs of more than 30 per cent.
TUC general secretary Paul Nowak told The Independent: “The British public agree – they overwhelmingly back a common-sense reset. The Conservatives’ botched Brexit agreement has set workers and business back, at home and abroad.
“It’s time for a new approach that honours the referendum result while giving us a much-needed closer trading relationship with the EU.”
The survey of 5,000 voters for the TUC by Mr McLeod revealed that 66 per cent now want closer ties with the EU.
Even some supporters of pro-Brexit parties want closer ties with the EU – Reform (former Brexit Party) voters now back closer ties with Brussels by 42 per cent to 41 per cent, while Tory voters overwhelmingly back closer ties by 67 per cent to 21 per cent.
The polling also showed that eight in 10 Conservative to Labour switchers at the 2024 general election, and more than half (56 per cent) of Reform-leaning voters (who voted Labour in 2024 but would now vote Reform) support a closer UK-EU relationship. Only 28 per cent opposed closer ties.
Mr McLeod said: "The new poll confirms that what we heard from those voters also holds nationally by a very strong margin.
"The focus groups help explain why a lot of people feel this way. The dominant view was that Brexit has not been a success and that it would be sensible to try for a better deal. Some of the Leave voters in our groups expressly said that their votes had been a mistake.”
Labour MPs are also demanding that the Brexit reset talks set to conclude in a month are made much more ambitious.
The Liberal Democrats are absolutely right to be pushing this.The best way to stand up to Trump is to work with our allies in the EU. Now is the time to start re-establishing those relationships.
Sunday, April 06, 2025
Tory defectors on ballot paper
The paper says that Reform has also selected an ex-Conservative for its candidate in the upcoming Runcorn and Helsby byelection, while the party’s mayoral candidate for Greater Lincolnshire is the former Tory MP Andrea Jenkyns, who lost her parliamentary seat in West Yorkshire last July:
All but one of Reform’s MPs, including the party leader, Nigel Farage, were previously members of the Conservative party.
Labour has accused Farage’s party of a “mass rebrand” as Reform populates its ranks with candidates seeking to “save their own political careers” after the Conservatives suffered huge losses in the 2024 general election.
A Reform spokesperson said: “This is less than 4% of all our 1,630 candidates. Is this the same Labour party that accepted the defections of then Conservative MPs Christian Wakeford and Natalie Elphicke?”
The Labour study of candidate nominations for the local elections in May shows more than 60 Reform council candidates across Britain have served as councillors, candidates or activists for the Tories.
Reform’s parliamentary candidate for the byelection in Runcorn and Helsby, triggered by the resignation of the Labour MP Mike Amesbury after a criminal conviction, is Sarah Pochin, a former Tory councillor for Cheshire East.
In social media posts that have been deleted since Pochin became a Reform candidate, she described her “absolute pleasure” posing in 2019 with the then levelling up secretary, Michael Gove, while she was a Conservative councillor, before describing her meeting with Liz Truss’s business secretary, Jacob Rees-Mogg, as “inspiring”.
Nineteen of the 23 councils up for election this May are run by the Conservatives. There will be mayoral elections in the West of England, and Peterborough and Cambridgeshire, and inaugural mayoral contests in Hull and East Yorkshire, and Greater Lincolnshire.
A Labour spokesperson said: “A snake might shed its skin but at the end of the day it’s still a snake. Is that why so many of Nigel Farage’s council candidates are slithering away from their years serving the Tory party?
I'm not quite clear what exactly Labour think they are achieving with this sort of rhetoric. Surely, it's universally known that large numbers of Reform members and candidates have come from the political right, many from the Conservative Party.
If former Labour voters are inclined to back Farage's horde as a protest vote, then Labour portraying Reform as Tory-lite is unlikely to dissuade them.
Saturday, April 05, 2025
Blunting the Percy Pig invasion
As the Guardian reports, Heard Island and McDonald Islands have been hit with a 10% tariff on goods. These islands form an external territory of Australia and are among the remotest places on Earth, accessible only via a two-week boat voyage from Perth on Australia’s west coast. The paper adds that are completely uninhabited, with the last visit from people believed to be nearly 10 years ago.
Other territories on the White House list were the Cocos (Keeling) Islands, Christmas Island and Norfolk Island. Norfolk Island, which has a population of 2,188 people and lies 1,600km (1,000 miles) north-east of Sydney, was hit with a tariff of 29% – 19 percentage points higher than the rest of Australia. This has left local officials scratching their heads.
The Guardian says that the United States' Observatory of Economic Complexity data believes that in 2023, Norfolk Island exported US$655,000 (A$1.04m) worth of goods to the US, with its main export being US$413,000 (A$658,000) worth of leather footwear. However, George Plant, the administrator of Norfolk Island, disputes this. He told the paper that: “There are no known exports from Norfolk Island to the United States and no tariffs or known non-tariff trade barriers on goods coming to Norfolk Island.”
The Guardian thinks that there has been a case of mistaken identity, and that in fact, the goods originated in Norfolk, UK:
The Guardian has identified two bills of lading – records of cargo shipments – for shipments each containing 3,714 black Timberland men’s ankle boots that set sail from South Riding port in the Bahamas for Miami, Florida, in December 2023. The shipments were worth a combined total of US$315,000 (A$498,000).
The bills of lading list “Norfolk Island” as the country of origin and the address of the shipper as Timberland, 200 Domain Drive, Stratham 03885-2575, Norfolk Island.
Timberland’s corporate office address is listed as 200 Domain Drive, Stratham, New Hampshire on its LinkedIn page.
A spokesperson for Timberland shoes said: “We are in a quiet period and have no comment.”
Other bills of lading that appear to have erroneously listed Norfolk Island as the country of origin include several from an aquarium and fountain company, OASE, which sent shipments from Norfolk in the UK to the US, and steel equipment sent from Novum Structures in Norfolk, UK, to the US.
Novum Structure’s address is listed on one bill of lading as 14 Hopper Way, Diss Business Park, Diss, Norfolk Island, instead of Norfolk in the UK, which is its EU headquarters, according to Novum’s website.
Meanwhile, stock markets all over the world are taking a massive hit as a result of these tariffs, with the consensus being that the United States' economy is going to suffer badly from rising prices and more unemployment as a result.
United States-based victims of the policy could well be those with a sweet tooth. The Guardian reports that Trump has effectively derailed plans by Marks and Spencer to launch its Percy Pig range in Target stores there.
The paper says that Archie Norman, the chair of M&S, has described Percy as the retailer’s “gift to America” but he told the Retail Technology Show in London that “we might have to change our minds” because Trump has imposed additional taxes on imported goods. They add that while M&S is not considering withdrawing the sweets, tariffs could push up prices and make them less popular:
The pink confectionery which sells more than 18m bags a year in the UK and is apparently enjoyed by celebrities including Adele and Olivia Rodrigo, went on sale in the US on 30 March both in Target stores across the US and on its website in what was described as Percy’s “biggest journey to date”.
The pigs may have to stay at home.
Friday, April 04, 2025
Two-child benefit cap ‘plunges extra 30,000 children into poverty under Labour
The paper says that last July ministers said they would consider ditching the “cruel” cap, in a bid to head off a backbench Labour revolt on the issue, but there has been no movement since, while official documents last week showed that separate moves to slash an extra £5 billion from the welfare bill are set to drive another 50,000 kids into poverty:
The cap now affects more than 1.6 million children, by limiting welfare payments to the first two children in most families.
New costings from Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) show another 109 more children are pulled into poverty by the policy every day.
And the number of children affected will continue to increase until 2035 - when the first children born under the policy turn 18.
The charity says that scrapping the cap would be the most cost-effective way to lift kids out of poverty.
Were the policy to be dumped, 350,000 children would be lifted from poverty at a stroke, it adds. The depth of the poverty experienced by another 800,000 children would be reduced.
Chief executive of the CPAG Alison Garnham said: “Every day the policy forces families to go hungry and damages the life chances of children up and down the country. Reducing the record high levels of child poverty in the UK will require a whole government effort, but abolishing the two-child limit is the essential first step.”
That this is happening under a Labour government is a disgrace.
Thursday, April 03, 2025
Cuts in disability benefits could add millions to council costs
The Guardian reports that the government’s plans to cut at least £5bn from disability benefits could end up driving more costs on to cash-strapped councils.
The paper says that the Resolution Foundation thinktank believe that up to 1.2 million fewer people could be eligible for Pip by 2029/30 as a result of the changes, including existing claimants losing their benefits when their needs are reassessed:
Critics warn that, without the financial support of Pip, some people’s physical condition or mental health could worsen to the point that they require council-funded care services, while their unpaid carers could become ineligible for the carer’s allowance benefit, meaning they may have to pass their care responsibilities to the local authority.
Last week, the Disability Policy Centre thinktank published analysis forecasting that the government’s cuts would lead to £1.2bn of extra costs for the NHS and social care services. “For every pound that someone loses in benefits, you know that – if a council has to step in to cover the shortfall – it’s about £1.50 additional impact,” said Arun Veerappan, the Disability Policy Centre’s interim director of research.
“Let’s say you need social care support at home. In order for the council to find that funding and administrative support, that will cost more – especially when it comes to finding the right community therapist and care. There’s not the resources for that … there’s not enough resources in the system to deal with that extra demand.
“If you lose carer’s allowance, you’re going to just push more people into the formal [council-funded] care system.”
He warned that forcing more people to rely on council care provision would lead to increased strain and delays in services such as community care and the Disabled Facilities Grant.
The cuts will target people whose Pip claims are based on illnesses or disabilities that affect them in multiple ways, rather than having very severe specific effects. The “daily living” or “care” element of people’s Pip payments is often – and controversially – used by councils to fund their care provision. If they lose these, councils will have to meet more of the costs themselves.
David Fothergill, chair of the Local Government Association’s community wellbeing board, said: “A reduction in Pip could mean lower individual contributions and therefore higher council contributions. We are still working to further understand the impact of the welfare reforms on adult social care charging.”
“The government’s ill-thought-out and harmful green paper chooses to penalise some of the poorest people in our society,” said Jon Abrams of Inclusion London, a deaf and disabled people’s organisation.
“What’s already clear is that these proposals are likely to hit disabled people who rely on social care. This green paper risks making an already broken social care system even worse.
“These proposals risk deepening hardship and pushing even more disabled people, carers and families into crisis, which could result in higher long-term costs for local authorities, the NHS, housing services and other support systems.
“Many disabled people and carers may also be forced to withdraw from the care system altogether, placing additional pressure and costs on the wider health economy.”
Some councils are already facing bankruptcy because of rising social care costs. The green paper could be the final straw for many.
Wednesday, April 02, 2025
Barnett formula short-changing Welsh public services on national insurance increase
The BBC reports that Wales' public services face a shortfall of up to £65m as a result of the National Insurance increase because, although chancellor Rachel Reeves has committed to covering the public sector costs in England, here in Wales the UK Treasury is using the Barnett formula for its calculations, leaving Welsh public services short, For once Welsh Labour are on the case:
Using the Barnett formula means that public sector employers in England, such as councils and the NHS, would be fully covered and those in Wales would not.
That is because the public sector in Wales is proportionately larger than in England.
Drakeford told Senedd members: "We should have been compensated for the actual costs not the Barnett share of the costs in England."
He said Chancellor Rachel Reeves was "wrong to do that".
"Treasury ministers had a choice to make, I believe they made the wrong choice."
Alun Davies described the population based formula as "not fit for purpose" and accused the UK government of breaking an agreement "where one government takes a decision which has a negative financial impact on another government then they should provide the costs in full".
Drakeford could not confirm what this would mean for public sector bodies in Wales, but said they would "look to see if there is anything further we can do to help those public services".
It will not just be charities, social care providers and other bodies that will be hit by the employer national insurance increase, but Welsh councils will face a shortfall as well, and that means that other public services will face yet more cuts. So much for a fresh start under Starmer's Labour.
April is the cruellest month
As the Guardian says, millions of households are facing a raft of price increases across a range of bills – from energy and water to car tax and the TV licence – that took effect yesterday.
The paper says that with so many costs rising at once – prompting some to label this month “awful April” – the government is facing fresh calls to take action to limit the impact of some of the increases:
The cost of gas and electricity is one of the biggest outlays for most households, and the cap on energy costs, which is set every three months by the industry regulator Ofgem, is going up by 6.4% – or £111 – on Tuesday. That takes the average annual bill to £1,849 for a typical dual-fuel household on a standard variable tariff.
This increase – the third in a row – means households will be paying about £600 a year more for their gas and electricity than before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine three years ago.
About 9 million households that buy their energy through variable tariffs will experience an immediate impact on their bills.
The Lib Dems have published a survey they say shows the “majority of Brits think their energy bill is bad value for money” . The party’s leader, Ed Davey, added that with families facing “spiralling” costs, the government must “get a grip on energy bills, and fast”. The Lib Dems want ministers to implement an energy “social tariff” to protect vulnerable people living in fuel poverty, and also do more to help the millions of pensioners who lost their winter fuel payments last year.
Rising energy costs are putting vital youth services at risk, said Social Investment Business, a charity. It claimed that utility bills were swallowing up half the budgets of some organisations focused on children and young people.
In percentage terms, water bills are receiving some of the biggest increases: an average of 26% – or £123 – for households in England and Wales this year. That price rise takes the annual average bill from £480 to £603. However, the increase will vary significantly depending on the water company. Customers of Southern Water, which covers parts of south-east England including Hampshire and Kent, face a near-47% rise.
Council tax is another big outlay, and the average bill for a typical band D property in England will be £2,280 for 2025-26, which is up 5%, or £109, on the 2024-25 figure. However, several councils were given government permission to raise bills by more than the cap. These include Bradford in West Yorkshire, which is raising bills by 9.99%, and Newham in east London, which is increasing them by 8.99%.
In Scotland most households face a council tax rise of at least 7.5%, while the average band D increase in Wales for this year is 7.2%.
Meanwhile, petrol and diesel car owners will pay £5 more a year in road tax, taking the standard rate cost on post-2017 vehicles to £195 a year.
The annual cost of a colour TV licence will increase by £5 on Tuesday to reach £174.50. And price rises will take effect on or around 1 April for the customers of a number of broadband and mobile phone companies. For broadband customers, the comparison website Uswitch estimated that the increases were poised to add an average of £21.99 annually for those on inflation-linked contracts, and up to £42 a year for those on newer plans taken out after rules were changed in January this year.
On top of all that, personal allowances remain frozen so that more people are paying tax for the first time, while the increase in employers' national insurance is likely to fuel inflation and possible lead to some reducing their workforce.
Things are nowhere near as rosy as my MP would like us to believe.
Tuesday, April 01, 2025
Quaker arrests foreshadow police state
“No one has been arrested in a Quaker meeting house in living memory,” said Paul Parker, the recording clerk for Quakers in Britain.
“This aggressive violation of our place of worship and the forceful removal of young people holding a protest group meeting clearly shows what happens when a society criminalises protest.
“Freedom of speech, assembly, and fair trials are an essential part of free public debate which underpins democracy.”
In a video posted on Youth Demand’s Facebook page, a woman who claimed to have attended the meeting described it as a “publicly advertised welcome talk” about the group. She said police seized attenders’ phones and laptops.
Youth Demand describes itself as “a youth-led nonviolent civil resistance campaign demanding the UK stops arming Israel and cancels all new oil and gas granted since 2021”.
The Quakers’ statement said they “strongly condemned the violation of their place of worship” and pointed to the stricter protesting laws brought in by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 and the Public Order Act 2023, which they claimed were directly responsible for the raid.
The Met police said it had arrested six people at the meeting on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. It said it arrested five other people for the same offence on Friday – four in London and one in Exeter.
The police said those arrested were part of Youth Demand and claimed those attending the meeting were planning direct action in the capital next month.
“Youth Demand have stated an intention to ‘shut down’ London over the month of April using tactics including ‘swarming’ and road blocks,” police said.
“While we absolutely recognise the importance of the right to protest, we have a responsibility to intervene to prevent activity that crosses the line from protest into serious disruption and other criminality.”
In George Orwell's terms, these people have been arrested for thought crimes. There is no evidence of criminal conspiracy, nor any violence, nor any abuse of free speech to damage public order. Free speech is now being criminalised. Isn't it about time the government repealed the Tory legislation that allowed this abuse of our democratic values.
