Relatively slim pickings in the Politics Hub this morning, but we’ve still got some budget speculation for you and an amusing tiff between two former prime ministers.
Here’s what you need to know:
- Sir Keir Starmer has refused to rule out an increase to national insurance for employers in the budget;
- The PM suggested to the BBC that Labour’s manifesto pledge not to raise the tax only applied to “working people”;
- He warned the budget – to be delivered on 30 October – will be “tough” but insisted it would be critical to “rebuilding our country”.
- The government has pledged an extra £68m for councils to build homes on disused brownfield sites;
- These include former car parks and industrial land across 54 local authorities, helping to deliver an estimated 5,200 homes;
- Labour have pledged to build 1.5 million homes this parliament.
- Lord Cameron says he planned to sanction two far-right ministers in the Israeli government over their comments about the war in Gaza;
- He said he wanted to do it to apply “pressure” to Benjamin Netanyahu, and urged the Labour government to consider it;
- Elsewhere, the former PM and foreign secretary has disputed a claim by Boris Johnson in his new memoir, where it was claimed he told him he’d “f*** him up” if he backed Leave in the EU referendum;
- “I find that hard to believe,” said Lord Cameron, who quit as PM after losing the vote back in 2016.
That’s all for now – we’ll have more updates for you this afternoon.
Teacher turned MP to introduce bill that would ban smartphones from schools
A teacher turned Labour MP will be introducing a bill to parliament next week that would make all schools in England free of smartphones.
Josh MacAlister’s bill is designed to protect children from excessive screen time, but the prime minister’s spokesman has indicated the government won’t support it.
“Headteachers already have the power to ban phones in school, and many have chosen to exercise this right,” they said.
“So we don’t have plans to legislate in that particular area.”
Current guidance intended to stop children from excessive use of their phones was introduced by the previous Tory government.
But it’s just that – guidance. Mr MacAlister’s bill would raise the bar, ensuring all schools must follow it by law.
He has compared the bill to a “seatbelt”, saying: “The evidence is mounting that children doom-scrolling for hours a day is causing widespread harm.
“We need the equivalent of the ‘seatbelt’ legislation for social media use for children.”
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has previously indicated support for the idea, describing the upcoming debate on the bill as “really timely”.
‘Truly Dickensian’ levels of tooth decay among young children
A minister has warned it will take time for the government to address issues with NHS dentistry – notably among children.
Health minister Stephen Kinnock told the House of Commons said there was urgent need to reform services, focusing on prevention of issues like tooth decay, and retaining dentists.
There are 13 million people with unmet needs for NHS dentistry, he said, and most disturbingly of all is the number of young children requiring hospital treatment for tooth decay.
Figures for England show 19,381 children aged five to nine were admitted for tooth decay in 2023/24.
Mr Kinnock said it was “completely and utterly shocking”.
“Truly Dickensian,” he added.
“We cannot fix this overnight. Therefore, we’re committed to reforming the dental contract, working with the British Dental Association to focus on prevention and retention of NHS dentists.
“We’re also working at pace to ensure patients can access 700,000 additional urgent dental appointments.”
What is the pensions triple lock?
The loss of the winter fuel payment for millions of pensioners is arguably the most controversial policy decision the government has made since coming to office in July.
But an assertion repeated by ministers is that thanks to the triple lock, which Labour are maintaining, pensioners will be better off regardless.
What is the triple lock?
Under the so-called triple-lock guarantee, the state pension increases every April in line with whichever is the highest of these metrics:
- Average earnings
- Inflation
- 2.5%
With inflation running at more subdued levels, it is expected wages will determine next year’s state pension increase.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures released on 15 October found total pay had increased by 4.1% annually.
What does that mean for pensioners?
It means the new state pension, for people who reached state pension age after April 2016, could rise from £221.20 per week in 2024/25 to £230.30 in 2025/26.
The old basic state pension could increase from £169.50 per week currently to £176.45 next year.
Of course, there’s still time for this to change, depending on upcoming inflation figures.
What is the history of the policy?
The measure was introduced by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government after they took office in 2010.
At the time, pensioner poverty was a big problem for the UK.
The then-chancellor, George Osborne, said bringing in the policy would see pensioners “have the income to live with dignity in retirement”.
Since then, it has been a staple of every Conservative manifesto and Labour vowed they’d keep it too.
The only time it has been paused since its inception was in September 2021 due to COVID.
‘Unacceptable’ to restrict aid into Gaza, minister warns Israel
Government minister Anneliese Dodds has been answering an urgent question about the situation in the Middle East.
It comes amid Israel’s continued military bombardments in Gaza and Lebanon, despite repeated calls from Western allies for a ceasefire.
Ms Dodds said the situation risked “spiralling further out of control and into wider regional war, which is in no one’s interest”.
She reiterates the government’s support for Israel’s right to defend itself from threats like Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas, and notes sanctions have been recently expanded in response to the former’s destabilising role.
But she expresses concern about reports of Israel’s conduct.
‘The message is clear’
On Lebanon, she says: “We were gravely concerned to hear five UN peacekeepers have been injured by the Israeli Defence Forces.
“We reiterate that attacks on UN peacekeepers and UN members of staff are unacceptable.”
On Gaza, Ms Dodds says the government is “gravely concerned” by how little aid is being allowed to enter, as the population faces the risk of famine and endures little access to basic services.
“The message from this government is clear: Israel could and must do more to ensure that aid reaches civilians in Gaza,” she adds.
“It is unacceptable to restrict aid.”
No 10 asked about possibility of sanctions on Israeli ministers
The prime minister’s spokesman says he “can’t get into any commentary around future sanctions designations” when asked about two far-right Israeli ministers.
It comes after former foreign secretary Lord Cameron said he was planning to sanction finance minister Bezalel Smotrich and national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir before the Tories left office.
He told the BBC he had been “working up” sanctions as a way of putting “pressure on Netanyahu” to act within international law (read more).
Responding, Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman said: “As you would appreciate, I can’t get into any commentary around future sanctions designations.
“As you know, the UK has already sanctioned a number of people responsible for settler violence in the West Bank, and we will obviously continue to take action to challenge those who undermine a two-state solution.”
Veteran’s ID cards will be valid for voting in elections, ministers announce
The introduction of voter ID laws by the previous government became a source of significant controversy before and during the election in which they were defeated.
The new Labour government is now carrying out a general review of the policy, which has prompted widespread criticism.
Indeed, just last month, the Electoral Commission said it “discouraged some people” from casting their ballot.
While the review of the policy has yet to yield any conclusions, ministers have now announced that veterans’ ID cards will be a valid form of identification for upcoming elections.
Forms of ID deemed acceptable currently include passports, driving licences, Proof of Age Standards Scheme (Pass) cards, Blue Badges and some concessionary travel cards.
But in May’s local elections, some veterans were dismayed that their ex-forces ID cards were not included in the list of acceptable forms of identification, which led to an apology from then-veterans minister Johnny Mercer.
‘No veteran should be turned away’
The government today brought forward changes to the law in parliament via a statutory instrument, which will add the veterans’ card to the list of acceptable ID.
Alex Norris, a communities minister with responsibility for elections, said: “No veteran should be turned away from the polling station while trying to use their veteran card as voter ID.
“They are an incredible community who have dedicated their lives to this country, and it is wrong that the exclusion of this card has been a barrier to their ability to vote.”
State pension increase set to land government with extra £100m bill, former minister says
The government is facing an extra £100m bill for the forthcoming increase in the state pension after revised official figures published today, a former pensions minister has said.
Under the so-called triple-lock guarantee, the state pension increases every April in line with whichever is the highest of earnings growth in the year from May to July of the previous year, CPI (Consumer Prices Index) inflation in September of the previous year, or 2.5%.
With inflation running at more subdued levels, it is expected wages will determine next year’s state pension increase.
Office for National Statistics (ONS) figures last month indicated that total pay had increased by 4.0% annually in the three months to July. But when jobs data was released on Tuesday, the ONS revised the figure up to 4.1%.
Chancellor facing ‘extra pressure’
Sir Steve Webb, a former Liberal Democrat pensions minister, said the additional 0.1 percentage point could add around £100m to the state pension bill.
Sir Steve, who is now a partner at consultants LCP (Lane Clark & Peacock) said: “A slightly higher rate of increase is welcome for pensioners, though will be an unwelcome £100m extra cost for the chancellor as she prepares her budget.
“The rate of the new state pension will now be close to £12,000 per year, very near to the £12,570 tax-free personal allowance. This is likely to put extra pressure on the chancellor to take action on tax allowances in the coming years.”
The revised wage growth figure means the new state pension, for people who reached state pension age after April 2016, could rise from £221.20 per week in 2024/25 to £230.30 in 2025/26.
The old basic state pension could increase from £169.50 per week currently to £176.45 next year.
September’s CPI figure has not yet been confirmed and will be released on Wednesday.
Labour accused of breaking manifesto promise with reported national insurance change
As we detailed in our 8.45 post, the Labour government is refusing to rule out reports that it will increase national insurance for employers.
Sir Keir Starmer declined to make such a commitment, while insisting his party would abide by its general election manifesto to not raise taxes on “working people”.
However, his claims are unsurprisingly not going undisputed, with other parties stating their opposition to any move to raise contributions from businesses,
Laura Trott MP, Conservative shadow chief secretary to the Treasury said: “In 2021, the chancellor said increasing employer national insurance was a tax on ‘workers’.
“That’s why even in her own words it breaks Labour’s manifesto promise not to increase tax on working people.”
She described it as a “tax on work” that would “deter investment, employment, and growth”.
‘Think again’
The Liberal Democrats, meanwhile, urged the chancellor to “think again”, with Treasury spokeswoman Daisy Cooper saying: “The burden of this budget should fall on the likes of big banks, social media giants and oil and gas firms, instead of our local community businesses.
“The chancellor should be protecting these smaller businesses, who are the backbone of our economy and the heartbeat of our communities.”
Cameron: I don’t remember telling Boris I’d ‘f*** him up’
Boris Johnson’s widely trailed memoir Unleashed was released earlier this month, following the publication of several excerpts presumably designed to entice potential readers.
Among them was a passage recounting discussions the then-London mayor had in 2016 with David Cameron, who was prime minister at the time.
Mr Johnson said the conversations in which he was urged to back the campaign to Remain in the EU in the forthcoming referendum saw him offered a “top-five job in the cabinet” if he acceded – but threatened if he decided to join the Leave side.
The passage in question said:
“The PM had rung me one evening at City Hall, urging me to make up my mind,” he said.
“I was torn, I said. I wanted to back him, but over the years I had written hundreds if not thousands of articles attacking the undemocratic features of the EU. I felt I had to be consistent.
“‘This isn’t about articles!’ he spluttered. ‘It’s about… the future of the country!’
“Well, I said, we were agreed on that but I was still thinking of voting Leave.
“‘If you do that,’ he said – and these were his exact words –’I will f*** you up forever.’”
He added: “I had to admit that the threat sounded serious. Did I want to be f***ed up? Forever? By a prime minister equipped with all the f***ing-up tools available to a modern government, and thousands of f***er-uppers just waiting to do his bidding?”
While effectively confirming the substance of the “spirited conversation”, Lord Cameron has now disputed the account of the language he deployed.
“I find that hard to believe,” he told Times Radio.
No fruity language, insists Cameron
“What I do remember saying is, ‘Boris, you’ve never backed Britain leaving the EU before, you’ve always said, let’s reform it, let’s change it. I said, why back it now when we got a better deal?’
“‘You might not like my deal. You might think you can do better when you become prime minister, as you probably will in a few years time. But don’t suddenly back something you’ve never backed before.’
“That was the argument I remember having.
“And I don’t remember any language any fruitier than that. But you know, memories, recollections differ, as they say.”