Thread: The British Prime Minister - for as long as there is a Great Britain

Dead man walking, dead man walking.

Well one year in and they've tanked the economy, killing what little growth was emerging as they took over by taxing businesses to fill the elusive £22Bn blackhole but then gave most of it away to the unions through public sector pay rises. The economy has since stagnated and companies have begun laying off staff and ffezzing recruitment. The much vaunted welfare bill, designed to bear down on the ever increasing disability benefits cost is now dead in the water because Labour simply cannot take money away from the feclkess, but who can blame the lazy when every week another 2000 migrants come across the chanel escorted by the the migrant taxi service (RNLI) ready to claim the hotel, food and a life on easy street with never a requirment to work for their handouts. So what is the solution to paying for these PIP claimants and migrants, well its the every decreasing pool of tax payers of course, and that pool is quickly becoming devoid of the rich as they take their money elsewhere.

We are just over 4 months away from Labours next budget and Rachel from accounts has promised she'd not raise taxes, well that was before over 120 MPs decided that for her and the only way to pay for all this will be a combination of creative accounting, stealth taxes and she is going to have to raise direct tax. So the only two cabinet members with any thought of curtailing the ever increasing state have lost and this Govt is now officially in the hands of the real Labour.

Starmer offers ‘massive concessions’ on welfare bill to Labour rebels


Exclusive: Leading rebels say they have been promised significant changes to planned cuts which could help bill avoid defeat
Keir Starmer has offered Labour MPs “massive concessions” on his controversial welfare bill in a move that has won over key rebels and is likely to have saved the prime minister from a damaging Commons defeat next week.

Leading MPs said they had been promised significant changes, which will cost the government several billion pounds over the next few years but would shore up the prime minister’s precarious authority.

The compromises on the planned cuts, which are understood to include applying the changes only to new claimants and further consultation on the most controversial cuts to disability benefits, were offered during a tense day of talks with Downing Street.

They mark a big U-turn from Starmer, who had said for weeks he would not change course, but was forced to back down after more than 120 Labour MPs threatened to kill the bill. One frontbencher had already quit over the plans, while others were understood to be prepared to do so if agreement had not been reached.

One of those leading the opposition to the bill said: “They’ve offered massive concessions, which should be enough to get the bill over the line at second reading.”

Another added: “We always wanted to protect the most vulnerable, not to destroy the bill or cause the government trouble. We always hoped there would be an off-ramp, and that’s what we have now.”

More hardline rebels were urging their centrist colleagues not to drop their objections, but with ministers insisting they would hold the vote on Tuesday, more moderate MPs were understood to be backing the government’s proposals. Sources said all select committee chairs were now supporting the prime minister.

Downing Street declined to comment.

Starmer sent his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, to lead the negotiations for much of Wednesday night and throughout Thursday, alongside the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, and her chief of staff, Nick Parrott.

The prime minister and his chancellor, Rachel Reeves, authorised those officials on Wednesday night to offer significant concessions in an attempt to rescue the welfare reform agenda, even though it will leave Reeves having to find more money at the budget.

There has been speculation from Labour rebels that welfare concessions will cost £8bn over the three-year spending review period.

The chancellor is already thought to be considering tax rises, having promised to reverse cuts to winter fuel payments at a cost of over £1bn. This latest reversal is likely to leave her with several billion pounds extra to find.

The compromise solution would mean the cuts being applied only to new claimants, while those who already get disability payments will continue to do so.

Ministers have also agreed to expand and bring forward a package of employment support measures so that £1bn will now be available for them this year, and several billion across the whole of the parliament. The government had previously promised just £1bn in this parliament, to be voted on at a later date.

Liz Kendall, the welfare secretary, will promise that disability groups will be consulted on how the criteria should change in the future. Changes recommended by that process will be incorporated at later stages of the bill, possibly at committee stage.

Rebels have also pushed to unfreeze the health-related element of universal credit, which is paid to those with severe long-term conditions such as a terminal illness. A House of Commons analysis shows that those claiming that benefit will lose nearly £250 by the end of the parliament as a result of the decision not to raise them in line with inflation.

Starmer offers ‘massive concessions’ on welfare bill to Labour rebels | Labour | The Guardian

fix this ... and it is entirely labour and the lefys fault........for years. The BMA have overseen strikes which have led to patients dying... there is nothing more to say, except now its their problem for a change - fuk i hate lefties

NHS sees patients as an inconvenience, says new boss

The NHS sees patients as an “inconvenience” and has “built mechanisms to keep them away”, its new boss has said.

Sir Jim Mackey said the health service was too often “deaf” to criticism, “wasted a lot of money” and deployed far too many “fossilised” ways of working that had not changed since its foundation in 1948.

In his first interview since becoming head of the NHS, Sir Jim told The Telegraph the health service had “made it really hard” for patients to get the care they needed.

“It feels like we’ve built mechanisms to keep the public away because it’s an inconvenience,” he said, warning that too many patients were left “ringing a number no one ever answers”.

Next week, the Government will publish a 10-year health plan that promises three major shifts in the way the NHS operates – from hospital to community; from analogue to digital; and from treating sickness to prevention.

There will be far more “neighbourhood health”, with NHS and private companies working for it to offer more care locally, including increasing the use of high street services.

A revamped NHS app will provide a new front door to the health service, with AI used to assess symptoms and direct patients to the right care, and users able to use the app to book appointments, contact medical teams and compare hospital outcomes.

The plan will also set out reforms to put the focus of the health service on the experience of patients.

The Telegraph can reveal that this will include trialling “patient power payments”, with hospitals only getting the full payment for treatment if the patient is satisfied.

The reforms are also set to change the way A&E departments are funded, with payment dependent on cutting long waits and shifting more care out of hospitals.

Sir Jim, who ran the NHS’s most successful hospital for 20 years, said he was driven by the poor experiences of his own family at the hands of the health service.

He was just starting a career in hospital management when his dying father suffered terrible care at the hands of the NHS.

That was in the 1990s; but the new head of the NHS says since then, far too little has changed.

“We’ve made it really hard, and we’ve probably all been on the end of it. You’ve got a relative in hospital, so you’re ringing a number on a ward that no one ever answers. The ward clerk only works nine to five or they’re busy doing other stuff; the GP practice scramble every morning.”

“It feels like we’ve built mechanisms to keep the public away because it’s an inconvenience.”

He goes further, warning that failing to listen to public frustration could mean the end of a publicly funded state health service: “If we lose the population, we’ve lost the NHS.”


The candour is startling; not least because it’s Sir Jim’s first interview since being appointed to overhaul an organisation long accused of a culture of denial.


It’s 8am on the seventh floor of Wellington House, NHS England’s headquarters near Waterloo, and the 58-year-old has been up for hours.


Recommended


NHS sent door-to-door to tackle crisis
Read more
Sir Jim, who was knighted in 2019 for services to health care, has been appointed to lead the NHS in somewhat unusual circumstances.


On the day Labour won the general election, last July, Wes Streeting, incoming Health Secretary, declared the health service “broken”.


It seemed inevitable that NHS England, the world’s biggest quango, which had been created under his predecessors, was for the chop.


But it wasn’t until February that Amanda Pritchard, its beleaguered chief executive, stood down, with Sir Jim, a long-time hospital boss, quickly announced as her interim replacement.

Access Denied

^ she going to have to walk back on her promises re tax etc after the entirely predictable cancelation of the benefit cuts bill, so Labour can protect the 100s thousands feckless on PIPs.. So this Govt with a massive majority has no PM who can launch a bill and get it voted through. So labour would rather tax the working than stop layabouts getting free handouts, all sounds very familiar

Labour’s ‘clusterf--- of Godzilla proportions’ ... so whose head will roll?


The list of those in the dock for the watered-down welfare Bill debacle is a long one

The benefits reforms passed in the House of Commons on Tuesday are a pale imitation of the package first announced by the Government in March.

Two significant concessions to rebels by Sir Keir Starmer have shaved billions off the savings the Bill was estimated to make from tightening up benefits rules.

Claimants who Liz Kendall, Sir Keir’s Work and Pensions Secretary, once said were “taking the Mickey” out of the system will not see any change to their entitlement. New claimants will be accepted under the existing rules until at least autumn next year.

The revolt of dozens of Labour MPs has left Sir Keir with an angry party, far fewer reforms than he hoped, and a black hole in the public finances worth billions of pounds.

“It makes the entire thing a total clusterf--- of Godzilla proportions,” said one MP on Tuesday night. “Only the gods know how this cobbled-together Bill does anything it’s supposed to any more.”

A morose minister added: “Today is not a good day.”

Downing Street is expected to make some changes to its operation as a result of the carnage. Labour rebels are divided on who is responsible for the debacle – but the list of those in the dock is lengthy.


Sir Keir Starmer

Some Labour MPs say the Prime Minister is responsible for the failure to keep his party in line.

They argue that it has been clear since March, when the plans were first announced by Ms Kendall, that they were never going to fly with Labour backbenchers.

Sir Keir has been accused of failing to keep in touch with his MPs, refusing to attend the Commons for votes, and trying to railroad his party into backing reforms without first earning their loyalty.

“Talking to colleagues and backbenchers, he has been very absent,” one minister said. “This has been a problem all along.”

There are few in the party who would call for Sir Keir to stand down – even privately – but there is a sense among MPs that he must take overall responsibility for mismanaging one of the most important policies of his administration so far.

He worsened the situation at the weekend, when he told The Sunday Times that the rebellion had only been allowed to grow because he was too focused on what was happening in the Middle East.

“There’s a lot of resentment in the party towards Keir,” admitted one Labour MP.

The Government agreed to make significant concessions to rebels amid protests against the welfare reforms on Tuesday Credit: Justin

Rachel Reeves

The self-described “Iron Chancellor” is also receiving a lot of flak from Labour insiders as the politician who most resisted making changes to the welfare reforms.

When the original “wrecking” amendment emerged early last week, insiders say it was Ms Reeves who urged No 10 to hold off on making any concessions. But that strategy only enraged MPs more, blowing the rebellion up into a crisis and triggering talk of an existential challenge for Sir Keir.

In the end, she was visiting a JCB factory when the decision was made to concede and let existing benefit claimants keep their entitlement. The fact she was not in the room when a fresh hole was blown in her Budget does not bode well for the Chancellor.

Ms Reeves is now in an unenviable position. She will have to increase taxes significantly later in the year to account for a total shortfall of about £40 billion – including about £3 billion created by these about-turns on welfare policy.

That will only make her more unpopular with the public, and there are now few Labour MPs who would go out and defend her.


Liz Kendall

The Work and Pensions Secretary was not a popular figure among the Labour faithful before taking office last July, having finished fourth in a party leadership contest won by Jeremy Corbyn in 2015.

She is viewed as a Blairite, and while her politics matches the more Right-leaning instincts of Sir Keir and his advisers, she has not broken into the clique of senior ministers who receive greater access to the Prime Minister, insiders say.

Since the beginning of the year, Ms Kendall has been given the “hospital pass” of implementing Labour’s welfare reforms – a brake on the relentless increase of Britain’s social security budget.

In March, the proposals were leaked to the media before they could be properly “pitch-rolled” by Downing Street, stoking an almighty row with Left-wing backbenchers.

MPs then claimed the Bill was rushed and poorly drafted, allowing senior Labour figures including Dame Meg Hillier, the chairman of the Treasury select committee, to rip it apart.


Morgan McSweeney

The Irish svengali at the heart of the Downing Street operation was blamed, as usual, when something went seriously wrong with one of Sir Keir’s flagship policies.

Mr McSweeney is widely regarded as a campaigning genius, but his critics say he would be better deployed in a more political role at Labour headquarters than running the nexus of government as Downing Street chief of staff.

On Tuesday morning, Sir Keir was forced to tell the Cabinet to stop briefing against Mr McSweeney after negative stories about his closest adviser reached a fever pitch at the weekend.

Speaking to The Telegraph, one minister said Mr McSweeney was responsible for the “woeful” management of MPs and had “been in a bunker with his head down”.

Many MPs say they don’t know Mr McSweeney but think of him as a sinister and arrogant figure, controlling the Government from the inside. His supporters say he attracts criticism and media coverage simply because he is better known than his colleagues.


Claire Reynolds

On paper, it is easiest to blame Claire Reynolds for the disastrous “political management” of the backbenchers in the lead-up to Tuesday’s vote.

The little-known Downing Street appointee is responsible for liaising between Labour MPs and the Government, suggesting ways for the Cabinet to engage with the party and, in short, keeping everyone happy.

But the failure to persuade MPs that they should remain loyal to No 10 was the most significant issue for Sir Keir in passing his reforms, which now lie in tatters.

“They now have a smoking ruin of a Bill that they’ve had to shred to head off a rebellion,” one Labour MP said. “How did a 100-plus majority come to this?”

Some MPs say they have never met or spoken to Ms Reynolds, a former Labour official who is the wife of Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, and is in charge with assuaging their concerns.

One Labour rebel said that simply being invited into Downing Street occasionally might have made them less likely to vote against the Government – which she could have organised.

Access Denied

Bereft and imprisoned, Reeves looked how voters feel
One hopes the Chancellor is okay, but whatever the cause of her distress, it was an act of folly to let her in front of the cameras for PMQs

Tim Stanley

02 July 2025 3:28pm BST


Bereft and imprisoned, Rachel Reeves looked how the voters feel

It’s the definitive image of Keir Starmer’s year (and it’s 2-1 that word never goes plural).

As he whanged on at the Despatch Box about how great he was, Angela Rayner looked ready to knife him and Rachel Reeves was in tears. “A personal matter,” a spokesman later said, for which one has sympathy, but a chancellor is a public figure and coke-heads in the City were selling their junk bonds fast, screaming: “What does she know that we don’t?!”

Perhaps that there is no money? Of course, everyone but the Labour Party knows this by now.

The first question at PMQs was from Labour’s Paul Waugh, who sang the praises of free school meals. (Has he ever eaten them?) When backbenchers speak, they should pop up like figures on a till. Ping! One billion for kiddies. Ping! A few billion for Universal Credit…

Kemi Badenoch, at the top of her game, awarded Waugh the prize of “toady of the week”. Waugh croaked, “she should withdraw”, but this wasn’t a cash machine and Kemi wasn’t a benefits cheat, so on she hammered. Could the PM tell us how much his rewritten welfare Bill will cost and how many would it get into work?

You can guess the answer: Liz Truss, Liz Truss, Liz Truss. Next time I’m asked why I drove drunk into a swimming pool at 100 mph, I’ll say: “Sorry, officer, but the Tories left a £22-billion black hole.”

“Has he read the papers this morning?” asked Kemi. “Where has he been?” The answer: put a pin on a map. Our Prime Minister is so disengaged from domestic affairs, it’s a surprise he didn’t arrive wearing a lei.

But while the PM was happy to deflect with a smile that bordered on simple, Kemi noticed something was awry with the rest of the bench. They looked as if they’d had words. Ange’s face was a mask of contempt. Liz Kendall was hiding in the wings, chewing on a nicotine patch.

And Reeves’s face was puffy with tears. “She looks absolutely miserable,” shouted Kemi, displaying Poll Tax levels of empathy, calling her “toast… a human shield”. It turns out that Right-wing Monetarists can be very unkind.

The Tories are happy because the issue is now tax. They don’t agree on anything else, but they do hate to put their hand in their pockets – and can smell the whiff of Labour tax hikes coming amid a breakdown in finances, affirmed by the Chancellor’s demeanour.

Never has the press gallery felt more horribly like a day trip to Bedlam. “Would you say it’s hay fever?” “Her eyes do look red.” “She was crying when she arrived.” “Look at her eat that mint.” Her chin was wobbling; this had to be something deeper than politics, but politics is like a dagger that digs into a wound. Will the Chancellor “be in post till the next election?” asked Kemi.

Starmer, a basically horrible man, declined to say. After another 20 excruciating minutes, Reeves left hand-in-hand with her sister.

One sincerely hopes the Chancellor is okay, but whatever the cause of the tears, it seems a sadistic act of folly to let her sit in front of the cameras. Bereft and imprisoned, she looked how the voters feel.

starmer is a repellent, vain, arrogant, dishonest, wildly over promoted, vindictive, spineless, robotic, heartless chancer with an army of skeletons in his cupboard.

when reeves is jettisoned to save his scrawny skin, lets hope she leaks all the gory details and brings him down. revenge is a dish and hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
a total shit show, all of them, amateurs and incompetents, spiteful socialist pigs, and they make the previous tory government look like true statesmen.

i have no sympathy at all for reeves. she's from a family of grifters, sister, husband, parents, sister's in-laws all on the public sector gravy train and contributing absolutely nothing to the economy except to take, take, take in true champagne socialist style.