And yet we fail to notice the unused levers that can help to stimulate growth, in particular the positive potential of the disabled workforce to stimulate growth – provided the right support is in place.

Earlier this month, The Disability Policy Centre released a timely new report on exactly this issue. ‘Access to Work: Employment that works’ makes a compelling case for increased investment in one of the government’s existing flagship work schemes for disabled people.

The report shows Access to Work helps keep up to 50,000 disabled people in work and that it’s highly cost-effective, saving the taxpayer nearly £70 million in government costs which would be seen without it.

For those who don’t know, Access to Work is a publicly funded employment scheme that helps disabled people start or stay in work by offering workplace equipment, money towards travel if public transport is inaccessible, or an interpreter or support worker.

And it’s a scheme I have personal experience of as someone who has directly benefitted from it – so I know what I’m talking about here when I say that Access to Work, when properly funded, can be the difference between working and not working.

The Disability Policy Centre go on to show how favourably Access to Work compares to alternative schemes, too. For example, the average annual Access to Work payment is estimated to be £4,000 and the average grant £7,200 to help keep a disabled person in a job. This is compared with the government spending over £25,000 per ‘job outcome’ created (or sustained employment) on new employment initiatives for disabled people.

Overall, this comes to £1.8 billion and four to six times more per job outcome. What’s more, modelling in the report shows a potential additional cost to the NHS of £910 per person per year if someone with a health condition becomes economically inactive, as well as additional Universal Credit costs of £7,386 per person.

Despite these obvious benefits, reports have started to gather over the past year of unofficial changes to Access to Work guidance in the Department for Work and Pensions, which has seen a sharp increase in cuts to people’s support. And the National Audit Office claims there are more than 32,000 outstanding payments, which of course puts customers in serious financial distress.

This report shows that, far from being bereft of ideas, Whitehall already has a functioning lever to pull to increase disabled employment: the Access to Work scheme. Crucially though, as the report makes clear, this scheme only works if the government provides the investment it needs, instead of gradually eroding resources.

In this era of gloom about growth, I believe we have, in fact, reason for great optimism. We need to be ambitious about disabled people working. We need to be ambitious about creating ‘good work’ that improves health outcomes. We need to be ambitious in ensuring we have a country that works for everyone.

I hope the government reads this report and sees that by investing in Access to Work, we can help disabled people get into and stay in the jobs they love, whilst reinvigorating our national economy.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Steve Darling MP: ‘The government has a proven lever for growth in its hands – it’s called Access to Work’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The Tropical Forests Forever Facility, or TFFF, is an innovative finance mechanism that would become one of the largest multilateral investment funds for nature, quadrupling the global finance available for forest protection.

The scheme is designed to halt the destruction of irreplaceable ecosystems like the Amazon, which are the lungs of our planet and the source of countless resources we depend on daily.

In the run-up to COP30, the UK played a leading role in helping Brazil design the framework. Yet, just as prime minister Keir Starmer flew into Belém, the gateway to the Amazon, the UK government unexpectedly announced that the UK would not join other major nations in contributing to it.

The justification given was “fiscal circumstances”. In plain speak, they simply did not want to be seen to be funding projects such as these whilst raising taxes in the budget.

But this is lazy, outdated and backwards thinking. The Treasury must recognise that contributions to mechanisms like the TFFF are investments and not costs. The chancellor has at her disposal ways to classify the TFFF contribution as equity investment or as a financial asset which would not impact her debt or deficit rules.

This is not a grant or a handout. It is a genuine win-win investment fund that, for the first time, creates a value for trees that is not carbon, delivers returns to investors while supporting Indigenous and local communities to keep their forests standing.

This knuckle-dragging thinking at the Treasury is creating a blocker to genuinely innovative and game-changing solutions we urgently need to save tropical forests and protect our planet. It’s also the thinking that falsely pits environmental protection against economic growth, despite the overwhelming evidence of the economic costs of a depleted and degraded natural world.

Before entering Parliament, I spent years working across Africa, South America, Central America and the Caribbean, supporting communities dealing with the impacts of nature loss and climate change. I saw first-hand the ravages of climate change and the devastating cost of inaction. I saw how virgin forest trees currently only have a value when they are on the back of a lorry for timber.

But I also saw the transformation that we can achieve when we work together and inspire leadership. That is why I have joined more than 60 cross-party MPs and peers in urging the Government to take up the opportunity it helped to shape and commit to the TFFF.

I welcome the energy secretary’s answer to my question in the chamber and his reply to the environmental audit committee that the UK’s contribution remains under review. The current situation undermines years of diplomatic work and has disappointed Brazil and tropical forest partners. If the UK wants to sustain its proud record of leadership on climate and nature, this cannot be a decision kicked endlessly down the road.

At a time when voices of climate denial and delay are growing louder at home and abroad, tropical forests like the Amazon can buy us precious time in the rapidly closing window to address climate change and nature loss. The TFFF offers a rare chance of a credible, global plan that finally makes keeping forests standing more valuable than cutting them down or burning them.

The UK helped design it. Now, ministers must listen to the cross-party calls across parliament and help deliver it.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Pippa Heylings MP: ‘Is the Treasury sabotaging Britain’s climate leadership?’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

But it’s not a done deal — key hurdles still need to be overcome to deliver what we promised at the last election. Not least the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats who have been working together in the House of Lords to try to weaken the bill.

Labour went into the last election promising change, and a key part of that change was the Employment Rights Bill. Through protection from unfair dismissal, ending exploitative zero-hours contracts, strengthening redundancy rights and sick pay, and making a raft of rights apply from day one, this change will deliver stability and security for working people.

But in the commons these measures faced opposition from the Conservatives and Reform, and in the Lords this opposition continued, with an alliance of Conservative and Lib Dem peers weakening the crucial measures around guaranteed hours.

Currently, flexibility in our labour market is far too one-sided, overwhelmingly favouring employers. Workers on zero and short hours contracts are left vulnerable to sudden changes in income and are expected to be available for work at very short notice, without any guarantee that any work will actually be available.

The proliferation of one-sided flexibility has had a profound impact on workers’ lives and is undoubtedly one of the most damaging labour market developments of the past 14 years.

A survey from my trade union Usdaw heard from staff who regularly worked far beyond their contracted hours, being turned down for a full-time contract. Members spoke of living with the anxiety of not knowing how much money they will have at the end of every week, struggling to arrange childcare and being forced to disrupt their children’s education, being turned down for mortgages because their contract doesn’t reflect the hours they work, and having to rely on foodbanks to get bridge the gaps where they don’t have work – despite having two zero-hours contract jobs.

And we need to be clear, not everyone on a zero-hours contracts is casually picking up a bit of extra cash here and there. The latest Labour Force Survey showed that over a million people in the UK are on a zero-hours contract, with further analysis from the TUC finding that nearly half those had been in their current job for over two years.

It’s about time this exploitative practice was brought to an end – and that’s what Labour’s Employment Rights Bill sets out to do.

The bill will make sure that everyone has the right to have a guaranteed hours contract – a contract that reflects the hours you actually work.

This means that if you want to remain on a zero-hours contract, if that works better for you, then you can. But if you want the security of those guaranteed hours, hours that you are already working and the consistent income that comes from them, then they’re yours.

These new protections could transform the lives of millions of workers, providing them with a stable foundation on which to build their lives around. But there are two big hurdles still to overcome.

First, when the Employment Rights Bill returns to the commons from the Lords today, we need to make sure the Conservative and Liberal Democrat amendments are voted down.

In a move that will dismay working people, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats have got the old coalition band back together, amending the bill in the House of Lords so that those on zero and short hours contracts now just have a “right to request” guaranteed hours.

This is not a minor change. It leaves the door open for unscrupulous employers to use pressure or coercion to deter requests, and for many, will completely undermine the new right. It will also put this crucial measure out of reach of those who simply aren’t aware of their rights.

Secondly, with so much of the detail yet to be decided in secondary legislation, we need to make sure we get this right. We cannot allow any loopholes and must ensure everyone is entitled to a contract that reflects the hours they regularly work.

This evening, workers across the country are counting on MPs to do the right thing and protect the new right to a guaranteed hours contract.

This was a major manifesto pledge for Labour. Delivering job and financial security must be a key aim of this government. There’s still work to do to make sure we get this right, but if we can end exploitative short and zero-hours contracts, the impact on the economy and the lives of workers up and down the country will be transformative.

This debate is not business versus workers as the Conservatives would have us believe, and it’s not about empty rhetoric and false promises that are all Reform have contributed to the debate. It’s about an economy that delivers for everyone through productivity and security.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Michael Wheeler: ‘We must not let a Tory-Lib Dem alliance weaken the workers’ rights bill’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

In the first-ever vote of its kind, MPs will consider a Liberal Democrat amendment to the new Football Governance Bill. The proposal aims to “tear down the paywall” that currently keeps the vast majority of top-flight English football behind subscription services.

If passed, the amendment would empower the UK’s new Independent Football Regulator to mandate that a selection of Premier League games be made available on channels such as the BBC and ITV. The proposal also calls for the League Cup Final and all three English Football League (EFL) play-off finals to be designated as free-to-air events.

According to the Lib Dems, La Liga, Spain’s top football league, has a deal with streaming service DAZN that offers one free game a week to fans. The party is suggesting that a model similar to that of the Spanish league could be adopted in the UK to “give the game back to fans”.

The coming 2025-26 season is the first season of the Premier League’s new TV rights deal with Sky Sports and TNT Sports. 

No matches under the new deal are currently slated for free broadcast.

The Lib Dems point to analysis of subscription prices which shows that, to watch each Premier League game, fans will now have to stump up an eye-watering £660 a year. Premier League viewership figures fell 10 per cent on Sky Sports last year, and fell a shocking 17 per cent on TNT Sport.

Max Wilkinson, Lib Dem spokesperson for culture, media and sport, said: “I’m urging MPs of all stripes to back our amendment to tear down the paywall and make Premier League games available on free to air channels.

“For too long, the jewel in the crown of British football has been locked behind an expensive barrier that keeps fans out while lining the pockets of broadcasters.

“Fans are being rinsed of every last penny to watch the beautiful game, while the next generation of Bellinghams and Bronzes are priced out of the chance to see football played at the very top level.

“That must end today – with a free to air revolution that gives the Premier League back to the country.”

Josh Self is editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here and X here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post MPs to vote on making Premier League games free-to-air appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

A national strategy for mathematics would provide a coherent framework to support mathematical talent from primary school through to the frontiers of research.

It would demonstrate that the government truly understands the role of mathematical thinking in securing our national security and future prosperity. After all, mathematical sciences contribute £495 billion to our economy, as well as providing the power behind a host of conveniences we all take for granted, including contactless payments – built on centuries-old algorithms – and the smartphones we carry in our pockets.

Mathematical sciences are central to cryptography and the cybersecurity that increasingly defines modern defence. Cheltenham’s GCHQ remains one of the country’s largest employers of mathematicians. Satellite technology crucial to our defence relies on mathematics, and as the recent government Strategic Defence Review highlighted, cyber warfare is fought with algorithms and equations. Mathematics underpins the technologies that will shape the future of warfare – quantum computing and AI among them.

But mathematics extends well beyond the realm of defence. It is woven into everyday life in ways we often don’t see.

Mathematics enabled the modelling of the Covid pandemic, guiding the epidemiology behind lifesaving vaccines. Climate science draws on mathematics to understand global warming and develop solutions. GPS and Wi-Fi both rely on advanced algorithms, and the CGI that brings Toy Story’s Woody and Buzz to life depends on linear algebra and topology – complex mathematics behind every animated frame.

Artificial Intelligence too, is fundamentally grounded in mathematics. The government’s enthusiasm for AI is welcome. Success in this area could indeed mean greater prosperity and security.

However, a gap seems to exist between the government’s ambitions and its appreciation of the mathematical foundations making them possible. As mathematician Marcus du Sautoy put it, “The UK government wants a Ferrari but doesn’t want to buy the fuel that drives it.”

Recent decisions cast doubt on the long-term vision. Funding has been discontinued for the Academy of Mathematical Sciences. The exascale computer project planned for Edinburgh has seen its funding downgraded and there is uncertainty around the timescale. The Advanced Mathematics Support Programme – key to developing talented young mathematicians – has faced significant cuts.

Meanwhile, mathematics provision is being reduced or shut down in universities across the UK. These closures create ‘maths deserts’, limiting access for young people eager to pursue their mathematical potential.

Post-1992 universities are especially affected. These institutions play a key role in training mathematics teachers. Seventeen per cent of mathematics graduates from them go on to teach – far above the five per cent from Russell Group universities. When these departments close, we don’t just lose degrees – we lose future teachers.

Still, there are solutions. The Campaign for Mathematical Sciences’ Maths Degrees for the Future initiative has shown that targeted grants can help universities reimagine their mathematics provision and promote the range of careers the subject can lead to. But scattered efforts, no matter how positive, won’t meet the scale of the challenge.

I was proud to lead this parliament’s first debate on this key area, but words alone won’t safeguard our mathematical future. The UK has the talent and expertise to remain a world leader in the mathematical sciences. The government must now demonstrate its commitment to the numbers that count.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Ian Sollom: ‘Why the UK needs a national strategy for mathematics’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Research conducted by the Lib Dems, based on government data issued in response to a written parliamentary question, reveals that 1.1 million standard-rate Pip claimants and 200,000 enhanced-rate claimants could lose at least some of the payment.

The planned reforms will tighten the eligibility criteria for Pip, which can help people with disabilities and those with long-term health conditions with their extra living costs. Under the new system, claimants will be required to score a minimum of four points in at least one of the ten daily living questions, such as on washing and cooking, to qualify for support.

The Liberal Democrat analysis suggests that under these rules, which would come into effect from November 2026, 87 per cent of current standard-rate claimants and 13 per cent of enhanced-rate claimants for the daily living component would be at risk of losing this support.

The analysis also identified the constituencies with the highest number of claimants who could be affected. Liverpool Walton was found to have the most, with 5,250 people at risk, followed by Blackpool South with 5,060, and Liverpool Riverside with 4,940.

The constituencies of senior government ministers are also set to be significantly impacted. In prime minister Keir Starmer’s seat of Holborn and St Pancras, 2,890 claimants could lose out. In the chancellor Rachel Reeves’ constituency, Leeds West and Pudsey, the number is 2,860, and in work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall’s Leicester West seat, 3,260 claimants are at risk.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The Liberal Democrats warned that many of the most vulnerable were “already on the brink” and called on the government to abandon the plans.

Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesperson, Steve Darling MP, said: “Many of the most vulnerable in our society are already on the brink and these figures reveal the scale of the misery that could be inflicted if these cuts go ahead.

“Countless people rely on this support to stay in work and just go about their daily lives. To strip that away from them is not only senseless but cruel.

“We need to see the government realise that this has the potential to devastate people’s lives and make it much harder to stay in work. Ministers must change course to avoid the real pain that could be inflicted.”

The government has previously argued that the reforms are necessary to make the system fairer and more sustainable, and to ensure that support is targeted at those with the most significant needs.

Speaking to reporters on his way to the G7 summit in Canada, the prime minister recommitted to the reforms. 

Asked about the prospect of a rebellion, with reports suggesting as many as 170 MPs could oppose the plans, Starmer insisted: “We’ve got to reform the welfare system.”

He said: “Everybody agrees with that proposition, so we’ve got to do that basic reform. It doesn’t work for those that need support and help into work, and it doesn’t work for the taxpayer.

“So, it’s got to be reformed. The principles remain the same; those who can work should work. Those who need support into work should have that support into work, which I don’t think they are getting at the moment.

“Those who are never going to be able to work should be properly supported and protected, and that includes not being reassessed and reassessed. So, they are the principles. We need to do reform and we will be getting on with that reform when the bill comes.”

It comes as a separate report from the all-party parliamentary group (APPG) on poverty said some claimants who will be made ineligible for Pip face losing £886 per month.

Green Party MP Sian Berry and Labour peer Ruth Lister, who serve as co-chairs of the APPG, said: “Disabled people already face unacceptable levels of hardship. These proposals won’t remove barriers to employment — they will add new ones by stripping people of the income they rely on to survive.

“The evidence is clear: these cuts will deepen inequality and force people further into crisis. We urge the government to listen to those most affected and change course immediately.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Starmer urged to ‘change course’ as disability cuts could see 1.3m claimants lose out appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

According to the YouGov poll for Sky News/The Times, Nigel Farage‘s Reform are up to 29 per cent, with Labour trailing on 22 per cent after dropping a point.

The Lib Dems are third on 17 per cent, with the Conservatives down to 16 per cent after slumping another two points.

The survey looks set to increase pressure on Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, after her party’s historically poor performance at the local elections. 

However, shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel has said the new poll is not “surprising” as rebuilding a political party “doesn’t happen overnight”.

Asked about the survey on Times Radio, Patel said: “I don’t think that’s at all surprising, because we did lose the general election last year. Rebuilding a political party doesn’t happen overnight…

“I recall this in 1997, it took us a while to come back. With that, rebuilding the party isn’t just in Westminster, it’s at the grassroots and in the country, and that’s what we’re focused on doing.”

Tory-Lib Dem crossover poll: Reform UK – 29%(+1) Labour – 22%(-1) Lib Dem – 17%(+1), Tory – 16%(-2) Green – 10%(+1)18/19 May via YouGov / Sky News / Times

— Josh Self (@josh.politics.co.uk) 2025-05-20T06:43:52.778Z

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

At the local elections, the Conservatives lost overall control of all 18 councils they were defending, with 23 councils in the race in total.

Badenoch said her party would “learn lessons” after it lost a total of 674 council seats.

The Reform and Liberal Democrat parties both made significant gains at the Conservative Party’s expense, winning another 677 and 163 seats respectively since elections were held in 2021.

The elections saw the Lib Dems take control of Shropshire from the Conservatives and take overall control of Oxfordshire and Cambridgeshire, while it became the largest party in Hertfordshire, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire and Devon.

Meanwhile, the Conservatives finished a distant third in the Runcorn and Helsby by-election with 2,341 votes, or 7 per cent. Reform won the seat by a margin of six votes, besting Labour by the finest by-election margin since World War Two.

Speaking after the local elections, Ed Davey declared the Liberal Democrats as “the new party of Middle England”.

The Lib Dem leader said: “We have overtaken the Conservatives at these local elections, putting us on track to overtake them at the next general election too.

“From Wiltshire to Oxfordshire, from Shropshire to Devon, the Liberal Democrats have replaced the Conservatives as the party of middle England.”

The Lib Dem leader credited his party’s success to former Tory voters “appalled by the Conservatives lurching to the extremes and cosying up to Nigel Farage”.

He added: “Today voters across the country have chosen our community politics over the Conservative Party’s neglect and disdain.”

The YouGov poll comes after a ConservativeHome survey of the Tory grassroots found Badenoch’s popularity had plummeted again since last month. The Conservative leader now records a new satisfaction rating of 0 points, down from +9 last month and taking her to 14th place. 

Overall, the average satisfaction rating for shadow cabinet members dropped from +12.62 last month to just +4 this month, something ConservativeHome, the Tory grassroots site, says “speaks to a general dissatisfaction with Kemi Badenoch’s top team.”

Asked this morning if the Conservative Party can come back from this latest nadir, Priti Patel told Times Radio: “Well of course we can. We’ve absolutely done it before. We’re working, I can tell you now, flat out to ensure that we can absolutely do that, but it takes time. 

“Winning back the trust and confidence of the British people takes time.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Conservative Party slumps to fourth behind Lib Dems, new poll shows appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Nonetheless, as a new Fire Commissioner prepares to take the helm, the alarm bells are certainly still ringing.

As the former chair of the London Assembly’s Fire Committee, I saw this firsthand when I led a recent cross-party investigation into Brigade workplace culture. We heard directly from both current and former firefighters, who shared disturbing stories of their experiences of racist and misogynistic bullying and discrimination, as well as their concerns about the repercussions of speaking out to report issues.

The LFB’s new Professional Standards Unit, set up in the wake of the review to investigate complaints of misconduct, has often been held up by both the Mayor and Commissioner as a real sign of progress. Yet our committee had serious concerns about the new unit, which we found not only slow and under-resourced, but also, critically, lacking in real independence.

For any system meant to root out misconduct, independence from the internal chain of command and Brigade hierarchy is essential. Without that, nothing changes: the same fear that stops firefighters having the confidence to report abuse, especially from more senior officers, will continue to prevail.

As Linda, the mother of Jaden Francois-Esprit, a young firefighter who took his own life in 2020, said: “Until [the Commissioner] exposes the truth of what’s really going on, culture is not going to change.”

Outgoing Commissioner Andy Roe described culture change as a “key pillar” of his leadership. But rhetoric is not reform. Progress on tackling racism and misogyny, building trust, and building a workforce that reflects London’s diversity, has all been painfully slow. Still worse, future funding to continue DEI efforts are already at risk to mounting budget pressures, as Roe himself has admitted.

Yet it would be a serious error if the new Commissioner were to cut funding or backtrack at a time when progress is still so necessary. In today’s political climate, with parties like Reform UK actively campaigning against equity and inclusion initiatives, it is more important than ever that the LFB’s new leader doubles down with concrete commitments to drive transparency and accountability from the top.

For starters, the LFB needs to do better than to mark its own homework through internally run complaint mechanisms. It is key that the new Commissioner appoints an independent Standards Commissioner entirely outside the Brigade’s internal hierarchy to oversee investigations. He should also welcome and work constructively with external scrutiny, whether the independent Fire Inspectorate, or the democratically elected London Assembly.

There should also be regular, transparent workforce surveys to build an accurate picture, and efforts to accelerate the recruitment and retention of diverse firefighters, while protecting and properly funding diversity and inclusion programmes.

Because we cannot afford to view these efforts as an optional extra. When firefighters fear bullying, harassment or retaliation for speaking out about misconduct, the safety of both personnel and the public is compromised. A fire service that tolerates discrimination internally cannot serve a city as diverse as London effectively.

And the firefighters who have had the courage to come forward deserve to be heard. Jaden’s family deserves honest answers and accountability. And every Londoner deserves a fire service that doesn’t flinch from uncomfortable truths but embraces proper scrutiny as the foundation for lasting change.

Only then will the London Fire Brigade truly serve, protect and include all Londoners.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post The London Fire Brigade can’t be allowed to dodge reform appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Labour is preparing for a difficult set of results — but it is Kemi Badenoch’s Conservative Party that is most exposed today. Of the 1,641 council seats up for grabs across 23 local authorities, trembling Tory incumbents are defending 954.

The majority of these council seats were last contested in May 2021, during a period of heightened popularity for the then-ruling Conservative Party and prime minister Boris Johnson. Badenoch is expecting a “correction” this time around, as the electoral landscape adjusts to the Conservatives’ current malaise.

In political terms, Johnson’s period of reinvigorated popularity — informed by Brexit goodwill and the Covid vaccine “bounce” — is ancient history.

The Liberal Democrats and Reform UK are expected to make considerable gains at the Conservative Party’s expense. A briefing to the Telegraph this morning suggests CCHQ predicts a total wipeout: a “confidential” memo projects that the Conservatives will lose control of all the councils they are defending — up to 770 seats — as well as all the mayoral elections taking place.

It’s possible that the Tories could win one mayoralty — perhaps Cambridgeshire and Peterborough — and suddenly declare that the results are not nearly as bad as the doomsayers foretold. (Think back to Ben Houchen’s victory in Tees Valley in 2024 and the subsequent spin). That is the nature of expectation management — and the stories pressured parties tell themselves, voters and the media, to artificially boost morale/spur positive coverage.

But such myths, as Rishi Sunak discovered in 2024, can only suspend reality for so long.

***This content first appeared in a special edition of Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, centring on the local elections. Sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

As far as Labour is concerned, dismal results will prompt questions about the direction of the party, the leadership’s chosen political narrative and its vulnerability — if borne out — across several flanks.

As alluded to, six mayoralties are also in play today, in the West of England, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, North Tyneside, Doncaster, Greater Lincolnshire, and Hull and East Yorkshire. But perhaps the most symbolic test will be the Runcorn and Helsby by-election, triggered by former MP Mike Amesbury’s resignation after his conviction for punching a man.

Together, these contests have attracted (arguably outsized) national interest because of the potential for a major Reform breakthrough: a turquoise wave. Nigel Farage’s party is contesting more council seats than any of its opponents. Meanwhile, expectations are leaning towards a Reform victory in Runcorn, once a safe Labour seat. And Farage’s party fancies its chances in at least a couple of mayoral contests — namely Greater Lincolnshire, and Hull and East Yorkshire.

As the results roll in, commentators and analysts alike will look to decipher a “message” in the data — one directed at Westminster from a disillusioned electorate. But the prevalent picture is likely to be fractious, as challengers to the left and right of the main parties secure marked gains at their expense. “Electoral chaos theory”, as political scientist Rob Ford has termed it, will be put into practice.

Of course, an electoral tapestry — weaved of turquoise, orange, green, blue and red threads — will require some unpicking on Friday. But two possible trends piquing my interest pertain to the extent and depth of enthusiasm for Reform. In other words: will Reform voters turn out to vote?

More in Common polling notes that Reform voters do not typically participate in these kinds of contests — and yet they are uniquely motivated to express their discontent in this contest. Will Farage’s voters turn out for him on the day? Can he capitalise on his momentum and spur further coverage for his insurgent party?

Underperformance could see Westminster question some of Farage’s more braggadocious rhetoric. But consider the headlines if Reform meets expectations, or over-performs.

Another set of questions: will anti-Farage voters turn out for Reform’s opponents on the day? To what extent is there a tactical “stop Reform” vote across the country — a constituency willing to lend their support to a second, even third, preference to thwart Farage? To what extent can the major parties, Labour in particular, weaponise such a voter group at future elections?

I hope to feature answers to at least some of these questions in Saturday’s Week-in-Review newsletter.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Tony Blair’s net zero stance ‘absolutely aligned’ with government policy, Starmer says

Lunchtime soundbite

‘All of those things have not happened, and you cannot just plough on regardless and throw all of these workers on the scrapheap’

—  Sharon Graham, general secretary of Unite, tells Times Radio workers cannot be thrown “on the scrapheap” in the pursuit of net zero.

Now try this…

‘Blair’s net zero intervention invites scrutiny of his institute’s donors’
Labour insider rebukes ‘tech bros’ within Tony Blair Institute as critics question past work with petrostates, the Guardian’s Kiran Stacey writes.

‘UK local elections 2025: How to watch like a pro’
Via Politico.

‘Keir Starmer would harm Labour’s chances in Runcorn by-election, say Labour MPs’
PoliticsHome reports.

On this day in 2024:

Kemi Badenoch insists PM not ‘under threat’ regardless of local elections outcome

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

The post What’s at stake in​ England​’s local ​elections​? appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

It comes as Donald Trump prepares to unleash his so-called “liberation day” tariffs on Wednesday, with none of America’s major trading partners expected to emerge unscathed.

The White House has reportedly drafted a proposal for the US to impose tariffs of about 20 per cent on most imports to the world’s largest economy.

Downing Street conceded earlier this week that it is almost certain that the US administration will include Britain in a new wave of reciprocal global tariffs.

The business and trade secretary, Jonathan Reynolds, has expressed his hope the UK can secure a trade deal with the US to mitigate the impact of the tariffs. But weeks of trade talks and diplomatic overtures have failed to produce a result.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

What Trump’s ‘liberation day’ will mean for Keir Starmer

Commenting ahead of “liberation day”, the Liberal Democrats are arguing that “cosying up” to Trump has not worked, urging the government instead to push for a “united front” with Commonwealth ally Canada and Europe. 

The party is calling on the government to negotiate a “bespoke” new UK-EU Customs Union to put pressure on the White House to end the trade war.

Calum Miller, the Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesperson, said: “Despite weeks of refusing to criticise Donald Trump’s damaging behaviour, it’s now increasingly apparent that the government will not secure a carve out for the UK ahead of Trump’s global tariff war.

“Trump has shown himself to be an unreliable partner on the economy. No one, not even the US’s oldest allies, are safe from the economic harm reaped by this White House.

“We need to end this trade war as quickly as possible. That means working with our Canadian and European allies in a united front against Trump, including retaliatory tariffs where necessary – as well as negotiating a bespoke new customs union agreement with the EU to better protect British businesses.”

Speaking on Monday, Kemi Badenoch said Trump’s tariffs could “cripple” some sections of the UK economy.

The leader of the Conservative Party said she was “very nervous” about the potential impact and urged the government to do “everything they can to negotiate away the possibility of tariffs”.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***
She told LBC: “I am very nervous. We wanted to have a UK-US trade deal when we were in government. Under president Trump we started negotiating, president Biden did not want to do any trade deals with any country.

“It is now imperative that we get a trade deal… and one that deals with the sectors that are most impacted, so manufacturing, car manufacturing in particular, steel, these are industries that will be severely crippled.”

Badenoch warned against a trade war and retaliation because that just “makes everyone poorer”.

“This is a time for significant diplomacy”, she added.

A member of the OBR’s Budget Responsibility Committee has said US tariffs at 20 or 25 per cent, if maintained on the UK for five years, would “knock out all the headroom the government currently has”.

Giving evidence to the Treasury select committee on the spring statement, David Miles said: “If tariffs at 20, 25 per cent were put on the UK and maintained for five years, our assessment of what that does is that it will knock out all the headroom that the government currently has.

“Had we made that a central forecast, and had the government not changed policy at all knowing that we were going to take that as our central forecast, then the headroom would have pretty much all gone.

“Of course that would have been in some ways, a very extreme assumption. Because not only would that be as bad as people might expect in the very near term, but it would have been maintained for five years, which is beyond the next presidential election in the US.”

However, Miles added that a “very limited tariff war” could be “mildly positive” for the UK.

He added: “There’s a bit of trade that will get diverted to the UK, and some of the exports from China, for example, that would have gone to the US, they’ll be looking for a home for them in the rest of the world.

“And stuff would be available in the UK a bit cheaper than otherwise would have been. So there is one, not central scenario at all, which is very, very mildly potentially positive to the UK. All the other ones which involve the UK facing tariffs are negative, and they’re negative to very different extents.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Trump tariffs of 20 per cent could ‘knock out’ government’s fiscal headroom, OBR warns

The post Starmer told to stand with Canada and Europe in ‘united front’ against Trump tariffs appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The party has urged ministers to place a 25 per cent retaliatory tariff on Elon Musk’s electric car company after the US announced that 25 per cent tariffs on all car imports will begin next week.

“I think there’s only one language that Donald Trump understands, and that is the language of strength”, Lib Dem deputy leader Daisy Cooper told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“What we Liberal Democrats are very concerned about is that the government strategy so far seems to be to cower in the corner and just ask Donald Trump to be nice to us and just to hope that he doesn’t do anything nasty.

“That is not a strategy. So we think the government needs to toughen up.

“We think the government needs to start preparing for retaliatory tariffs, and that those tariffs, that preparation, should start by looking at putting tariffs on Tesla cars, because clearly Elon Musk is a huge backer of Donald Trump, and that’s where we would start.”

Cooper also urged the chancellor to rule out tax breaks for US tech barons such as Musk, and scrapping or reducing the digital services tax.

Media reports have suggested that Britain could slash the digital services tax — a levy on big tech companies — in order to stave off US tariffs. 

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The comments came as the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, revealed the government is in discussions with the US about what the new 25 per cent tariffs on imported cars will mean for the automotive sector. 

Speaking to Times Radio, Reeves said: “The prime minister went to Washington just a couple of weeks ago and met the US president, and we are now having extensive talks with our counterparts in the US to protect trade between our countries. 

“Those conversations will continue.”

She added: “A million British people work for American firms. A million Americans work for British firms. Our two economies are so closely intertwined…

“I believe — and we make this case to the United States — that free trade, fair trade, is good for both of our countries, but let’s see where we get to in the next few days.”

During a press conference in the Oval Office on Wednesday, US president Donald Trump announced that cars and light trucks imported into the US would be subject to a 25 per cent tariff. 

“What we’re going to be doing is a 25 per cent tariff for all cars that are not made in the United States”, Trump said. 

The announcement came after the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR), the fiscal watchdog, halved the UK’s economic growth forecast from 2 per cent to 1 per cent. 

In its economic forecast published on Wednesday, the OBR said the most “severe” scenario, in which the UK and other nations retaliated to the imposition of tariffs, would see GDP 0.6 per cent lower than forecast this year and 1 per cent lower next year.

This scenario would also “almost entirely eliminate” the chancellor’s £9.9 billion headroom against her fiscal rules, the watchdog added. That could force Reeves to return for further spending cuts or tax rises.

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Lib Dems: Government must ‘toughen up’ on Trump with retaliatory Tesla tariffs appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

It was announced on Sunday evening that Mark Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, will be the new Canadian prime minister after he won the Liberal Party leadership contest.

Carney, who also used to head up Canada’s central bank, won 85.9 per cent of vote cast by 150,000 members in a landslide victory. 

Carney’s tenure begins as Trump, the US president, steps up his threats against Canada, which he has vowed to make America’s “51st state”. Trump repeatedly referred to Carney’s predecessor, Justin Trudeau, as the “governor” of Canada. 

In his victory speech, Carney hit out at Trump for “attacking Canadian families” and wanting to “destroy the Canadian way of life”.

He described the US president’s tariffs and threats as the “greatest crisis of our lifetime”.

“There is someone who is trying to weaken our economy. Donald Trump. Donald Trump has put unjustified tariffs on what we build, sell and how we make a living”, Carney said.

After the US last week levied sweeping 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods, Canada retaliated with its own 25 per cent tariffs on up to $155 billion in US goods over the course of this month.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Starmer, the UK prime minister, has now been urged to show solidarity with Carney and Canada by making a visit to the Commonwealth country this week. 

Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey has said it is vital for both British and Canadian security that the Commonwealth allies “stand strong together”.

In comments overnight, he urged Starmer to show a “united front” against Donald Trump’s “senseless” threats against Canada’s sovereignty and economy.

Davey said: “I would like to express my warmest congratulations to the new leader of Canada, Mark Carney. We treasure Canada’s historic relationship with the UK and I look forward to our two nations’ ties becoming ever stronger during your premiership.

“It’s vital for both British and Canadian security that we stand strong together. With global instability rising, it’s never been more important to show a united front with our Commonwealth friends — and to stand together against Trump senselessly turning the screws on his allies, whether that’s Canada, the UK or Europe.

“Responding to the trade war along the North American border, our prime minister must stand in solidarity against Trump’s bullying and visit Ottawa in a joint show of strength. Starmer must be clear that Trump’s threats against Commonwealth nations’ sovereignty are unacceptable.”

In a session of prime minister’s questions last month, Starmer was urged to call out Trump’s “childish nonsense” over Canada ahead of their meeting in Washington DC.

Conservative MP Simon Hoare said that when the PM meets the US president, whom he referred to as the “former leader of the free world”, he does so “with the hopes and prayers of this House and the country.”

Hoare added: “Whilst Ukraine will clearly dominate, will the prime minister undertake to raise with president Trump that Canada is a valued, respected and much-loved member of both NATO and our Commonwealth?

“This childish nonsense of a 51st State should be called out by the prime minister for what it is.”

Starmer responded: “The UK and Canada are close allies and have been for a very long time, with a partnership based on a shared history and a shared set of values and a determination to be an active force for good in the world.

“We work closely with them on issues of the Commonwealth on NATO, and of course Five Eyes intelligence-sharing. And we will work to strengthen that relationship.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Conservative MP urges Starmer to address Trump’s ‘childish nonsense’ over Canada

The post Show solidarity with new Canadian PM amid Trump ‘bullying’, Starmer urged appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The Liberal Democrats have written to the attorney general, Lord Hermer, as pressure mounts on the government to seize frozen Russian assets and repurpose them to fund support for Ukraine. 

The calls for the government to move from freezing Russian assets to seizing them have grown in recent days in light of US president Donald Trump’s decision to suspend military aid to the war-torn Eastern European country.

The Lib Dem request also comes amid suggestions that Lord Hermer is holding up a plan to seize frozen Russian assets. According to The Times newspaper, the attorney general has been criticised by some in government for warning ministers against the move.

There is a “live discussion” across Whitehall about options for using Russian assets to plug the gap left by the pause in US military assistance to Ukraine, the newspaper reports. 

Rishi Sunak, the former prime minister, is among those advocating a seizure of Russian assets to fund the Ukrainian war effort and/or future re-development projects.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Week-in-Review: Lord Hermer, Blue Labour and the defining choice Keir Starmer faces

Sunak told the House of Commons on Tuesday: “Events overnight [Trump’s decision to suspend military aid] make it even clearer that Europe must find considerably more resources for Ukraine.”

He added: “The chancellor has rightly continued our policy of using the interest on frozen Russian state assets to benefit Ukraine, but I believe now is the moment to go further and to actually seize those assets.

“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates the principle of sovereign equality providing a basis in international law for this and by acting in concert with our allies we can ensure there are no risks to financial stability.”

Responding to Sunak at commons Treasury questions, chancellor Rachel Reeves insisted that it is “incredibly complicated” to take further action in line with international law. However, she added Russia should “pay for the damage that Russia has caused”.

Reeves said: “As the prime minister said yesterday, we would look at going further but as [he] knows it is incredibly complicated to do that in line with international law, but we keep all options on the table because [he] is absolutely right, Russia should pay for the damage that Russia has caused.”

Ben Maguire, the Lib Dem shadow attorney general, has now written to his government counterpart demanding he publish the legal advice underpinning ministers’ decision-making around the potential seizure of the assets.

Commenting, Maguire has urged the government to “make his reasoning public” — calling for “proper scrutiny” of the decision as Ukraine’s military capacity to resist Putin is undermined by the White House.

Trump’s decisions to cut aid to Ukraine and ban the UK from sharing military intelligence with the besieged nation have “crippled” Zelensky’s defence effort, he added.

The Lib Dem MP said: “Zelensky’s besieged nation has been crippled by Trump’s callous approach to Ukraine’s defence. From cutting aid to banning intelligence sharing at the drop of a hat, it’s clear we need a plan B to halt Putin’s brutal invasion.

“We know that the UK holds billions in frozen Russian assets – capital that could transform Kyiv’s defence effort and counteract the reckless decisions coming from the White House. We’ve rightly seized the interest on these assets, but it’s time for Britain to go further and faster.

“That’s why I’m calling on the UK Attorney General to make his reasoning public, and publish his legal advice to the government on seizing the frozen assets in full. We need the chance to properly scrutinise the decision-making on this crucial issue, so the UK can then make the right choice for Ukraine.”

His letter to Lord Hermer adds: “Currently, the profits accruing from frozen Russian assets across the UK are being used to fund Ukraine’s resistance. This is the right thing to do.

“It is essential, however, that the UK goes further and faster. US president Trump’s decision to suspend military aid supplies and intelligence sharing with the Armed Forces of Ukraine makes it imperative that we do more, now, to contribute to Kyiv’s defence…

“As Attorney General, will you — as a matter of urgency — publish the legal advice that you have provided to the UK government in relation to the proposed seizure of frozen Russian assets?”

Foreign secretary David Lammy has agreed in principle that Europe should “move” from freezing Russian assets to seizing them.

Late last month at commons Foreign Office questions, the foreign secretary was urged to introduce legislation to “repurpose” Russian assets for the Ukrainian war effort by Lib Dem MP Alison Bennett.

Lammy insisted that this is not an issue on which any government can act alone. “We must act with European allies”, he said.

He added: “It was a topic of conversation at the G7. It was a topic of conversation at the Weimar group. And of course, Europe has to act quickly. And I believe we should move from freezing assets to seizing assets.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Rishi Sunak: Now is the moment to seize Russian assets to help Ukraine

The post UK government urged to publish legal advice on seizing frozen Russian assets appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The comment came as the US vice president rejected British and French plans to send peacekeeping forces to Ukraine as a “security guarantee”.

In an interview with Fox News overnight, the US vice president said the only way to secure lasting peace in the region is to grant the US an “economic upside in the future of Ukraine”.

He said: “If you want real security guarantees, if you want to actually ensure that Vladimir Putin does not invade Ukraine again, the very best security guarantee is to give America [an] economic upside in the future of Ukraine. 

“That is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years.”

UK prime minister Keir Starmer and French president Emmanuel Macron have raised the prospect of stationing military personnel in Ukraine in order to police the peace that the US administration is seeking. 

Starmer has also insisted that a “US backstop” is needed to deter Russian president Vladimir Putin from sending his forces against Ukraine again.

But Vance added: “The only guy in town with a strategy is the president of the United States, and everybody needs to follow his lead.”

The UK has been involved in several military interventions since 1980, including as an ally of the United States. Hundreds of British service personnel were killed when the UK fought alongside the US in Iraq and Afghanistan during the early 2000s.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Senior Conservative MP says UK must consider possibility ‘Trump is a Russian asset’

Liberal Democrat defence spokesperson Helen Maguire, a former Captain in the Royal Military Police who served in Iraq, reacted scathingly to Vance’s interview. 

She said: “JD Vance is erasing from history the hundreds of British troops who gave their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I saw firsthand how American and British soldiers fought bravely together shoulder to shoulder. Six of my own regiment, the Royal Military Police, didn’t return home from Iraq. This is a sinister attempt to deny that reality.

“As the UK’s representative to the US, Peter Mandelson should call on Vance to apologise for these comments.”

Vance’s comments come as the White House seeks to pressure Volodymyr Zelenskyy to agree to an unconditional ceasefire with Russia. To that end, US president Donald Trump has ordered that all military aid be suspended to the war-torn Eastern European country.

A White House official said late on Monday night: “President [Trump] has been clear that he is focused on peace. We need our partners to be committed to that goal as well.

“We are pausing and reviewing our aid to ensure that it is contributing to a solution.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

UK must work with US whoever is in office, Rayner says after Trump suspends Ukraine aid

The post JD Vance accused of ‘erasing’ British history after ‘random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 years’ jibe appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The Conservative leader was asked to summarise the United Kingdom’s political landscape for an international audience during an interview with Canadian psychologist and DailyWire host Jordan Peterson. 

In her reply, Badenoch sought to correct Peterson’s suggestion that Reform UK, lead by Nigel Farage, is the UK’s third party after Labour and the Conservatives. 

“The third party in this country is the Liberal Democrats, who have more votes and have fourteen times as many members of parliament as Reform has”, she said. 

The Lib Dems, led by Sir Ed Davey, won 12.2 per cent of the vote and 72 seats at the 2024 UK general election. Reform UK won 14.3 per cent of the vote but only five seats. 

Badenoch went on to dismiss the Lib Dems as a “protest” vehicle “for mainly people on the left”, despite the gains the party made across several onetime Conservative stronghold constituencies, such as Maidenhead (ex-PM Theresa May’s former seat) and Esther and Walton (ex-deputy PM Dominic Raab’s former seat). 

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

The Tory leader said: “Now, the Liberal Democrats are basically a protest party for mainly people on the left, and they don’t have much of an ideology other than being nice. They will go with all sorts of extreme things, you know, extreme gender ideology, etc.

“Reform is representing the rage that a lot of people are feeling about things going wrong in the country, but it’s all rage. It’s not courage.”

She added: “And a lot of traditional Labour voters are also going to Reform because they’re angry with their traditional party, and then people who don’t want to have anything to do with it vote Liberal Democrat.”

NEW: Kemi Badenoch acknowledges the existence of the Lib Dems- Considers them a “protest party for mainly people on the left”- "They are not on Twitter, but they are in local communities"- "They will destroy the whole country…"Transcript from DailyWire interview with Jordan Peterson

— Josh Self (@josh-self.bsky.social) 2025-02-19T08:53:20.725Z

Asked by Peterson why the Lib Dems get less coverage “on the international side” than other parties, Badenoch responded that they are “not on Twitter”. 

She said: “They are not on Twitter, but they are in local communities. A typical Liberal Democrat will be somebody who is good at fixing their church roof. And, you know, the people in the community like them, they are like ‘Fix the church roof, you should be a member of parliament’. 

“And they want to be nice. But actually, they’ve got lots of very silly and foolish ideas, along with, you know, being able to fundraise for a local community. And then they have bad views on national security, for example, they don’t want us to keep maybe a nuclear deterrent.”

The Liberal Democrats’ 2024 general election manifesto states that the party supports “maintaining the UK’s nuclear deterrent with four submarines providing continuous at-sea deterrence, while pursuing multilateral global disarmament.”

Badenoch added: “They have silly ideas about education. They don’t want people to go to prison. They want prisons closed down. Let’s just have restorative justice. You know, people being nice, and if you’re not paying attention, you will think ‘that’s good, these are nice people. We should vote for them’, but actually they will destroy the whole country if you if you let them at it.”

Peterson then asked the Conservative leader if the Lib Dems are distinguishable “ideologically” from the Labour Party. 

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Badenoch responded “no”, but went on to note the Lib Dems’ appeal in more rural areas compared to Labour’s urban base. 

She said: “You will find Liberal Democrats in a lot of rural constituencies, because they talk about the environment, something that we care about as well, but they talk about it in a way that resonates with people who want to maintain things as they are. 

“So Liberal Democrats don’t like building anything. They want everything to stay as it is, which itself appeals to a certain kind of conservative. ‘You know, I don’t want anything to change’, and they will block any kind of thing being developed.”

She added: “And what is interesting is that as politics becomes more volatile, as we have more social media and people retreat into echo chambers of agreement with this, we’re seeing a lot more fragmentation across the board. 

“If this was a country where you had proportional representation, it would probably come out in the wash, but we don’t. So you will have a party like Labour, which has won a landslide majority on 34 per cent of the vote. That is a scandal.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

Why the Liberal Democrats are taking on Trump and Musk

The post Kemi Badenoch: Lib Dems ‘not on Twitter, but they are in local communities’ appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

An emboldened Trump is making good on his threats. He is “flooding the zone” with a deluge of executive decrees, outlandish cabinet nominations and White House proclamations. His opponents merely tread water as the new order of things sweeps them away.

In this regard, across the Atlantic in the United Kingdom, the big “L” Liberal Democrats may well be showing their unofficial sister party how it’s done.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

The Lib Dems, after a historic general election campaign under Ed Davey’s buccaneering leadership secured 72 MPs, have found their voice in a crowded UK political scene as the prime critics of Trump’s revolution.

The Lib Dems have assumed this anti-MAGA mantle largely by default, that said. The Labour Party, a natural ideological opponent of Trumpism, has been silenced by its government duties and diplomatic responsibilities. The Conservative leadership has positioned itself as supportive of Trump’s general initiative. Nigel Farage’s Reform UK is MAGA’s British spin-off. Meanwhile, the Green party — whose criticism might even trump Davey’s — still struggles to cut through the Westminster noise.

The bottom line is this: political circumstance, on both sides of the Atlantic, has conspired to carve a neat niche for Ed Davey’s party — one it is excitedly exploiting.

Davey used both of his questions at PMQs yesterday to direct his fire at the Trump White House. “Eighty years ago this week”, the Lib Dem leader began, “the allies began a pincer movement against German forces between the Ruhr and the Rhine.

“British and Canadian troops attacked from the north, Americans from the south. British, Canadian and American soldiers were fighting shoulder to shoulder to defeat fascists.”

He added: “Eighty years on, president Trump seems to have forgotten all that. His tariffs against steel and aluminium will hit Canada the hardest, but they will also hit jobs and the cost of living in our country.”

Davey called on the government to draw up plans for retaliatory “Tesla tariffs” on Elon Musk’s electric vehicle firm if Trump carries out his threat to hit the UK steel industry. Musk, the tech billionaire Tesla CEO, is a prominent member of Trump’s administration as its efficiency tsar and chief social media propagandist.

Responding, Starmer promised a “level-headed assessment of the implications” of Trump’s avowed actions — but no “Tesla tariffs”. Davey’s comeback was measured: “It seems to me that, given the way in which president Trump and his ally Musk are operating, they need to hear of strong measures and hear strong words even from their allies.”

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

The Lib Dem leader moved onto the subject of Ukraine and warned that if Trump forces the surrender of its sovereign territory “that will be the greatest betrayal of a European ally since Poland in 1945”.

He asked: “Can the prime minister reassure the House that he and other European leaders have given sufficient support to president Zelensky so that he cannot be bullied by Trump and Putin into accepting a deal that would effectively hand victory to Russia?”

Starmer repeated the Nato line that his aim is to “put Ukraine in the strongest possible position.”

This morning, the Liberal Democrats issued a press release calling for emergency legislation “in the next few days” to seize frozen Russian assets and “back Ukraine”. Davey accused the government of “sitting on its hands” and urged Downing Street to cancel the upcoming recess to ensure the requisite legislation is passed. (Some old Lib Dem habits die hard).

As a party willing to break a Westminster taboo and take on Trump, the Liberal Democrats are honing a distinct political identity. The MAGA worldview of course, is an anathema to the liberal democratic values Davey’s party champions. But since the coalition government (2010-2015), the Lib Dems — like the US Democrats today — have struggled to forge a unique, compelling sense of self. “Remain” (or indeed “revoke”) under leader Jo Swinson was, after all, an electoral dud.

Today, Davey is finding purpose for the Lib Dems — in a parliament teeming with parties and led by a progressive government no less — with his Trump criticism.

The anti-Trump stance also reinforces the Lib Dem commitment to strengthening Britain’s ties with Europe. Davey called on the government to negotiate a bespoke EU-UK customs union arrangement in a set-piece speech last month; that, he said, would allow the UK to handle “president Trump from a position of strength, not weakness”.

***This content first appeared in Politics.co.uk’s Politics@Lunch newsletter, sign-up for free and never miss our daily briefing.***

At Westminster, the Lib Dems are the main party urging the government to invigorate its Brexit “reset”. In other words, the Liberal Democrats are driving against the grain and saying and doing things that are, well, popular. A bold strategy if there ever was one.

According to recent Ipsos research, just 22 per cent of Britons hold a favourable view of Donald Trump, compared to 63 per cent who hold an unfavourable one. Only 17 per cent hold a favourable view of Elon Musk — again, with 63 per cent unfavourable.

A majority of voters (57 per cent) back a UK-EU youth mobility scheme, according to BMG Research for The i Paper. Just 14 per cent are opposed. (The Lib Dems recently introduced a bill in the commons calling for exactly this).

YouGov polling suggests 48 per cent of voters support rejoining the customs union, with 20 per cent opposed. (That is similar to, but not the same as, the Lib Dem proposal to negotiate a new UK-EU customs union).

The Lib Dems’ parliamentary largesse presents the party with far more opportunities to voice these opinions than have come their way in recent years. Ahead of the 2024 general election, the Lib Dems had 15 MPs at dissolution despite a string of by-election victories. Davey was forced to hopefully “bob” at PMQs in vain hope of catching the speaker’s eye. Today, he is endowed with two questions every week (and the straightforward task of following Kemi Badenoch).

With the Tories tracking to the right under Badenoch, the Lib Dem knotweed could still tighten its grip on the 59 constituencies it won from the party last July. Indeed, a new YouGov survey suggests Britons prefer the prospect of a prime minister Davey to a prime minister Badenoch; on the measure of “who would make the best PM”, the Lib Dem leader is selected by 26 per cent. Just 17 per cent prefer his Tory counterpart.

The local elections on 1 May will no doubt prove a happy hunting ground for Davey’s “Tory removal service”.

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

Lunchtime briefing

Rachel Reeves vows not to accept an ‘economy that has failed working people’

Lunchtime soundbite

‘The BBC’s investigation raises serious questions for Rachel Reeves. Keir Starmer said “restoring trust in politics is the great test of our era”.

Until she comes clean — not just about her CV but about the circumstances in which she left HBOS, no one will take him seriously.’

—  Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch responds to a BBC Newsinvestigation (see below) into Rachel Reeves’ work at HBOS and her expenses.

Now try this…

‘The chancellor and her expenses before she became an MP’
According to BBC News, one ex-colleague of Rachel Reeves said she nearly got sacked following an investigation into three senior managers accused of “signing off each other’s expenses”.

‘Reeves’s CV exaggerated time at Bank of England’
More from the BBC.

‘Trump and Putin stun Europe with peace plan for Ukraine’
US president announces that talks with Russia’s leader on ending the war will start “immediately,” after his defense chief warns that Ukraine’s peace goals won’t be met, Politico reports.

On this day in 2023:

‘Cash for Boris’ row: Can Richard Sharp survive as BBC chair?

Subscribe to Politics@Lunch

The post Why the Liberal Democrats are taking on Trump and Musk appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Speaking alongside Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House, Trump said the two million Palestinian people living in the territory, which he described as a “demolition site”, would go to “various domains”.

He vowed to rebuild the strip into the “Riviera of the Middle East”.

Reacting to the proposal, the UK Liberal Democrats called Trump’s comments “bizarre” and “dangerous.”

Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesperson Calum Miller said: “Donald Trump’s proposal for Gaza is bizarre but also dangerous. It shows casual disregard for the rights and aspirations of Palestinians and threatens the basis for peace at this fragile moment.

“The UK cannot be silent — we must make clear that this proposal is damaging, wrong and would amount to a severe breach of international law.

“Now is the moment for the UK to immediately recognise Palestine as a state, to make clear our commitment to a two-state solution based on 1967 borders.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

A member of the UK cabinet appeared to hit back at Trump’s plan for Gaza on Wednesday morning, arguing Palestinians “need to be able to return to their homes.”

Steve Reed, the environment secretary, reiterated the government’s support for a two-state solution to the conflict and said Israel should exist alongside “a free and viable Palestinian state”.

“Palestinian civilians have been through a living nightmare for the last 14 months, they need to be able to return to their homes and start to rebuild them”, Reed told Sky News.

He rejected that he was being disparaging of the US president in any way, and gave Trump credit for helping secure the current ceasefire.

He added: “I think we should give Donald Trump credit for the role he played in securing the ceasefire in the first place, but it is the view of the UK government that Palestinians should be able to return to their homes.”

Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, also commented on Trump’s proposal on Wednesday morning. She said the US president had set out a “vision” for rebuilding Gaza but suggested he was getting ahead of himself.

Patel said given a ceasefire had only recently been agreed, any rebuilding was still “some way off yet”.

Asked if Trump had set out a “smart” plan, the shadow foreign secretary told the BBC: “Everyone recognises the fragility of the entire situation. We are still in a ceasefire with three phases, we are not through the first phase.

“Coming to the rebuilding is of course phase three and having a vision and what we heard overnight absolutely sounds like a vision in terms of rebuilding, creating hope, opportunity, prosperity for the people of Gaza, that is obviously an end state.

“But how to get there and what we have heard overnight is something that I think we are all going to be following.”

She added: “We have all been speaking about a two-state solution for many, many years, in fact decades. When the ceasefire was announced clearly that was a big aspiration, perhaps a staging post on where we could actually end up but I think the rebuilding side, phase three, is some way off yet.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Keir Starmer told ‘UK cannot be silent’ over Donald Trump’s ‘dangerous’ Gaza plan appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

The shadow home secretary said that “as a country we need to lift our game” when it comes to productivity to compete with countries such as China and India.

Philp cited economic inactivity statistics that show nine million adults of working age are not in employment, adding: “We need everybody to be making a contribution

Appearing on the BBC’s Political Thinking podcast, Philp was asked: “Do you think that belief in hard work is something that’s missing in Britain today?”

Philp replied: “I do a bit. 

“There are nine million working age adults who are not working, and as we compete globally with countries like South Korea, China, India — we need a work ethic.

“We need everybody to be making a contribution. We are in, as George Osborne said years ago, we are in a global race, and that means we’ve got to be competitive, and it means we’ve got to work hard.

“I think as a country, we need to lift our game, we need to up our game.”

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

Responding to his comments, a Labour spokesperson said: “Chris Philp was the architect of the Liz Truss Budget which crashed the economy and sent family mortgages rocketing.

“After the Conservatives’ economic failure left working people worse off, it takes some real brass neck for the Tory top team to tell the public that it’s really all their fault.

“It’s the same old Tories. They haven’t changed and they’ve learned nothing.”

A Liberal Democrat spokesperson added: “No-one can doubt Chris Philp’s work ethic after he crashed the economy in just 39 days as Treasury minister under Liz Truss.

“He also treated himself to a £5,000 taxpayer–funded handout after finally resigning from Boris Johnson’s government.

“The British public will no doubt take his advice with a bucketload of salt.

“The Conservatives could do with showing a bit more humility after trashing the economy and leaving the NHS on its knees.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Chris Philp claim Britain needs better ‘work ethic’ slammed by Labour, Lib Dems appeared first on Politics.co.uk.

Marking five years since Britain left the European Union, Davey also accused the prime minister of “living in a parallel universe” if he thinks that the UK economy will grow “without boosting trade with our nearest neighbours.”

The Liberal Democrat leader said: “A new UK-EU customs union deal will unlock growth, demonstrate British leadership and give us the best possible hand to play against President Trump.”

In January 2020, Britain officially left the EU after voting to leave four years prior via referendum. 52 per cent of voters backed the UK’s exit from the EU in 2016, with 48 per cent siding with “Remain”. 

A YouGov published earlier this week recorded that just 30 per cent of Britons now say it was right for the UK to vote to leave the EU. 

More than six in 10 Britons (62 per cent) say that Brexit has so far been more of a failure — against just 11 per cent who feel that it has been more of a success. A more noncommittal 20 per cent of Britons consider it to be neither a success nor failure, YouGov found. 

The polling also revealed that as many as one in six “Leave” voters (18 per cent) say that it was wrong for Britain to choose to leave the EU. 66 per cent still say Britain made the right decision. 

By contrast, 88 per cent of “Remainers” think a vote for Brexit was wrong, with just 7 per cent saying it was the right choice.

***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***

In a recent speech, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch appeared to acknowledge her party had made mistakes following the 2016 referendum. “We announced that we would leave the European Union before we had a plan for growth outside the EU”, Badenoch said. 

The Lib Dem leader used his own New Year’s address, delivered on 16 January, to call on the government to negotiate a customs union arrangement with the EU. 

Davey argued such a deal would allow the UK to handle “president Trump from a position of strength, not weakness.”

He said: “Forming a customs union with the EU is not only the single biggest thing we can do to turbocharge our economy in the medium and long term. But an agreement to work towards one would unlock big economic benefits for the UK now and start tearing down those damaging Conservative trade barriers this year. 

“It would be a win-win for our country, and I still can’t understand why the government continues to rule it out.”

At prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, Davey reiterated his call for the prime minister to go further in his pursuit of a UK-EU relationship “reset”. 

Davey said: “The chancellor has now admitted that we need to go further and faster in the pursuit of economic growth, and we agree, but the prime minister knows that we believe that means setting aside his objections to a UK-EU customs union so that our country can go further and faster in rebuilding our trading relationships with our European neighbours.”

Keir Starmer replied: “[He] knows that in relation to the reset with the EU, which we are determined to achieve, we have clear red lines when it comes to the single market and the customs union. 

“He knows where we stand on that.”

Commenting on the fifth anniversary of the UK leaving the EU, Davey said: “The UK needs to lead in Europe and the world. It’s clear we cannot rely on Donald Trump – a man who has threatened to invade a NATO ally — to secure our continent. Strengthening ties of diplomacy and security with the EU is urgent.

“We must repair the trading relationship with our neighbours that was so badly ruined under the Conservatives. Their deal has been an utter disaster for our country – for farmers, fishers and small businesses — caught up in red tape.

“So far the Labour government has failed to show the urgency and ambition needed to fix our relationship with Europe. Ministers must be in a parallel universe if they think we can grow the economy without boosting trade with our nearest neighbours.

“A new UK-EU customs union deal will unlock growth, demonstrate British leadership and give us the best possible hand to play against President Trump.”

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.

The post Ed Davey marks Brexit anniversary: Conservative deal has been ‘disaster’ for Britain appeared first on Politics.co.uk.