Business secretary Kemi Badenoch was put on the spot on Sunday morning over the failure of the government to secure a free trade deal with United States, as had been promised by many Brexiteers.
In an interview with the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, Badenoch was repeatedly pressed on the topic.
Advertisement
“There is no sign of that American trade deal that is promised,” Kuenssberg said.
“That Brexit promise of a sort of buccaneering Britain massively benefiting from trading around the world, that just has not come to pass has it?”
Badenoch said the lack of a trade deal with the US was because of the “change of administration” from Donald Trump to Joe Biden.
“We can’t force other countries to do things that are different from what they want to do,” she said.
Kuenssberg pressed: “But that was a promise that was made to British voters.”
Badenoch said: “That was an agreement that was had with the previous president. You cannot force countries to join free trade agreements.”
Advertisement
Kuenssberg added: “So, it was a promise then that you were never going to be able to keep?”
A free trade deal with the US was one of the main selling points for Brexiteers in the run-up to the 2016 referendum.
But Liz Truss finally admitted in September last year – during her short time as prime minister – that it was not going to happen any time soon.
Rishi Sunak also conceded on a trip to Washington in June that an agreement was no longer “a priority” for either side.
Badenoch was speaking to the programme from New Zealand signed the UK up to the the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).
The trade zone of around 500 million people includes Australia, Canada, Mexico, Brunei, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
Advertisement
Badenoch hailed the agreement as having “so much potential” as “the world is our oyster”.
But the government’s own assessment of the deal suggests it could add only 0.08% to the size of the UK’s economy in 10 years.
Speaking to the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme this morning, the Labour leader was asked if the cap would be removed.
Advertisement
But Starmer said: “We are not changing that policy.”
Later in the interview he said that “of course” it was worth him angering people on the left of Labour if it was necessary to win the election.
“The Labour Party was created to give working people not just representation in parliament but a government in parliament that can govern on their behalf and change the lives of millions of people for the better,” he said.
“I have been changing the Labour Party to put us in a position where we are now credible contenders for the next election.”
The Child Poverty Action Group (Cpag) has warned the cap is “pushing families into deep poverty”.
According to the charity, it affects 1.5 million children including 1.1 million children growing up in poverty, with their families are missing out on up to £3,235 a year.
“The impact of growing up in poverty can be lifelong,” it warned. “Abolishing the two-child limit is the most cost-effective way of reducing child poverty.
Advertisement
Cpag said scrapping it – at a cost of £1.3bn – would lift 250,000 children out of poverty, and a further 850,000 children would be in less deep poverty.
In an interview with the Daily Mirror on June 3, Ashworth said the cap was “absolutely keeping children in poverty”.
“At this stage we are not outlining our full universal credit reform policy but we are certainly determined to tackle child poverty,” he said.
“We are very, very aware that this is one of the single most heinous elements of the system which is pushing children and families into poverty today.”
During a debate in parliament last week, Labour MP Kim Johnson joined with many Labour MPs to call for Starmer to commit to ditching the cap.
Advertisement
“We need to end this horrendous two-child policy and ensure all children have the opportunity to thrive and grow and not live in poverty,” she said.
“The cap has done immeasurable damage to so many families in this country, impacting poverty and driving more families into poverty.”
Humza Yousaf, the Scottish first minister, said: “Poverty experts say scrapping the two-child limit would lift up to 15,000 children in Scotland out of poverty.
“Why on earth is Starmer committed to keeping this cruel Tory policy? Only the SNP offer real change and the chance to escape Westminster control with independence.”
A lawyer for Hunter Biden sent a cease-and-desist letter to Donald Trump’s legal team on Thursday, warning the former president to stop spreading dangerous rhetoric online, ABC News first reported.
In the letter, attorney Abbe Lowell argued that Trump’s posts and language “could lead to [Hunter Biden’s] or his family’s injury”, citing several examples from recent months.
Advertisement
Trump has frequently targeted Hunter Biden — in fact, Lowell claimed in the letter that his name has appeared more than 20 times in Trump’s posts in July alone.
This week, Trump dragged in Hunter Biden’s name amid an investigation of a small baggie of cocaine found this month near a visitor entrance at the White House, suggesting the cocaine might have belonged to Hunter Biden, who is a recovering addict.
“You know, if Mr Trump does not, that Mr. Biden has neither committed nor been accused of the charges that your client is claiming … and that the Biden family was not at the White House (let alone in the vestibule) in the period when the cocaine was found,” Lowell wrote. The Secret Service concluded the cocaine investigation on Thursday with no suspect found.
A day later, Trump put up a post attacking David Weiss, the federal prosecutor who oversaw Hunter Biden’s tax investigation, according to the letter. Biden reached an agreement in June and will plead guilty to some federal charges. Trump called Weiss a “coward” and asserted that he “gave out a traffic ticket instead of a death sentence”.
Advertisement
“You may respond that this was a mere figure of speech. However, we have seen that what might pass as such a phrase when uttered by [rational] people is heard by too many in this country as some terrible injustice for which they must take physical and violent action,” Lowell wrote in the letter, referring to Trump’s alleged incitement of the attack on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
Throughout the letter, Lowell continued to cite notable examples of Trump using dangerous rhetoric and language to incite violence. Last month, Trump also posted on his social media site the alleged address of former President Barack Obama’s Washington, DC, residence, NBC News reported. The post was reshared by Capitol riot defendant Taylor Taranto, who was arrested June 29 after approaching Obama’s house while his van was parked nearby with weapons inside.
“This is not a false alarm,” Lowell wrote in the letter. “We are just one such social media message away from another incident, and you should make clear to Mr Trump ― if you have not done so already ― that Mr Trump’s words have caused harm in the past and threaten to do so again if he does not stop.”
Trump has faced legal repercussions for rhetoric he has spread both online and offline, which, as Lowell cautioned in the letter, has the potential to escalate if he doesn’t dial back on it. The attorney encouraged the former president’s legal team to explain to him “how his incitement can further hurt people and cause himself even more legal trouble”.
HuffPost reached out to Trump’s lawyer Joe Tacopina, who declined to comment.
It was immigration minister Robert Jenrick who ordered the artwork of Mickey Mouse and other cartoon characters be painted over last week, the i newspaper revealed.
Advertisement
Jenrick reportedly felt they gave the impression Britain was too “welcoming” to people crossing the English Channel in small boats.
The Kent Intake Unit mainly processes children who arrive solo unaccompanied by an adult. The move comes as Rishi Sunak’s government has made cracking down on immigration one of its central goals.
In the House of Lords on Tuesday, minister for migration and borders, Lord Murray of Blidworth, dismissed the concerns of Labour’s Lord Dubs, who fled the Nazis as a child.
Lord Dubs said: “The minister has just said that the government takes the welfare of unaccompanied children seriously.
Advertisement
“How does that relate to the arrival centre in Dover which had cartoons and welcoming signs for children and which were ordered to be removed by the Home Office minister because it might make the children feel too welcome? Isn’t that a disgrace?”
Lord Murray responded: “The murals he refers to were provided by our detention contractors and were not commissioned or approved by the Home Office.
“It is clearly the correct decision that these facilities have the requisite decoration befitting their purpose.”
Asked by @AlfDubs about disgraceful actions of @ukhomeoffice to remove cartoons from Kent reception as they are ‘too welcoming for children’, Minister says: ‘It is the correct decision these facilities have the requisite decoration befitting their purpose’ 📢Shameful cruelty pic.twitter.com/q1zOLmjQck
— Every Child Protected Against Trafficking 🧡 (@ECPATUK) July 10, 2023
Conservative peer Lord Brownlow responded by saying he was “quite frankly ashamed at your last answer minister”, adding: “I think people in this House and the wider community would have preferred your answer to have been ‘it was a mistake to paint over those murals and that a contractor would be commissioned to repaint them’.
Advertisement
“We are a welcoming country and whilst I accept the bill is needed to deter it is time we showed some compassion.”
In response, Lord Murray said: “This is a detention facility for those who entered the country unlawfully and it’s appropriate that it be decorated in a manner which reflects its purpose.”
The government has pledged to stop overcrowded dinghies making the journey from northern France to the UK. More than 45,000 people arrived in Britain across the Channel in 2022, and several died in the attempt.
The House of Commons was emotional as a Conservative MP made a moving tribute to Harriet Harman following attacks from Tories over Boris Johnson and partygate.
Conservatives allied to Johnson have suggested veteran Labour MP Harman, who chaired the privileges committee which found the former MP guilty of lying to parliament repeatedly, was biased because of tweets she posted about partygate before taking up the role.
Advertisement
On Monday, MPs approved the committee’s report that judged the former prime minister’s outriders had launched a “co-ordinated” attack on its work.
During a debate ahead of the report being nodded through without the need for a vote, Conservative MP Laura Farris made an intervention damning her Tory colleagues.
Emotional moment in the Commons as Conservative MP Laura Farris pays tribute to Harriet Harman – and puts into context the claim by Tories such as Jacob Rees-Mogg she had a “vendetta” against Boris Johnson while chairing the privileges committee https://t.co/PCzbicL3va? pic.twitter.com/ChQCZqwcwk
Harman has long been aware of the potential issue – and asked the government for the green light to continue as chair of the committee investigating Johnson.
Advertisement
Harman said she wanted to avoid the “perception” that she was biased against the former PM – and was “assured that I should continue the work” by the prime minister at the time, which was still Johnson.
During Monday’s debate, Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Johnson loyalist who was criticised for his role in the attacks on the committee, maintained it was “legitimate to question” Harman’s position.
But Farris took a different view, defending Harman and paying tribute to her career – with her parliamentary colleague close to tears as a result.
Farris said: “The member for Camberwell and Peckham (Harman’s constituency) had already announced her intention to retire from parliament at the next election.
“A parliamentary career that has spanned five decades and has been defined by her commitment to the advancement of women’s rights.
Advertisement
“Fourteen weeks before she took up that appointment (as committee chair) her husband of 40 years, Jack, had died.
“Against this background, I invite members of the House to consider what is more likely – that she agreed to chair the committee as a final act of service to this House, or that she did so because she was interested in pursuing a personal vendetta against Boris Johnson.”
Farris continued: “It is completely unacceptable to allege or insinuate that members of the privileges committee are corrupt or that the inquiry was somehow rigged.”
Harman’s husband, Labour MP Jack Dromey,died suddenly in his flat in Birmingham in January last year.
The initial report by the privileges committee, which has a Conservative majority, suggested Johnson should face a 90-day Commons suspension if he had not already quit parliament ahead of its release.
Immigration minister Robert Jenrick order the painting, and another one of Tom and Jerry, be painted over because they were too welcoming for children.
Advertisement
On Sophy Ridge on Sunday on Sky News this morning, Treasury minister Victoria Atkins was repeatedly asked whether she was “comfortable” with the controversial move, but refused to do so.
Pointing to a picture of the centre, Ridge said: “If you have a look at it here – Minnie and Mickey Mouse here, Tom and Jerry there, and that was painted over, the decision taken by Robert Jenrick, the immigration minister, because it was too welcoming.”
The murals at the Kent Intake Unit in Dover
HM Chief Inspector of Prisons
Atkins insisted that children who arrive in the UK on small boats are “looked after properly”, but said the government wanted to stop them making the perilous journey in the first place.
Advertisement
But Ridge replied: “Just looking at this picture, I don’t believe you’re comfortable with the decision to paint over – I don’t believe it.”
The minister said: “I’m not comfortable with the idea that people would bring children across.”
The presenter hit back: “I can absolutely understand that, but that’s not the decision of the children. The decision to paint over this mural, it’s a place where kids go – they must be terrified when they go and sit on those chairs, they don’t know what’s happening and where they’re going to go.
“There was an active decision to paint over Mickey and Minnie Mouse. Are you happy with that?”
As she tried to dodge the question again, Ridge said: “Are you comfortable with this? You wouldn’t have done it, would you?”
Atkins replied: “When children come to the UK in those very frightening circumstances, we want them to be looked after well and looked after properly by local authorities.”
In a final attempt to get the minister to answer the question, Ridge said: “I think you can believe all of that and still be kind of uncomfortable about the idea that you’re part of a government that would paint over this mural.”
Advertisement
The minister responded: “What I care about is how those children are looked after when they come here and I’m confident that they’re given the care and the welfare that we would expect and we would want.”
The mural was installed at the Kent Intake Unit, which mainly processes children who arrive in the UK on their own unaccompanied by an adult.
The murals feature in an HM Chief Inspector of Prisons report published in February following an inspection of the facility after its opening in November.
After the i newspaper revealed the order to paint over them, Labour’s shadow immigration minister Stephen Kinnock tweeted: “The idea that painting over murals for unaccompanied children in immigration centres will somehow stop the boats is utterly absurd. This is a sign of a chaotic government in crisis.”
Advertisement
The Lib Dems tweeted: “This is the worst kind of trivial nastiness – a Mickey Mouse minister taking an axe to Mickey Mouse.”
Johnny Mercer clashed with Labour frontbencher Bridget Philipson repeatedly on the corporation’s flagship politics show, and faced criticism for talking over fellow panelists.
At one point, the Opposition MP was joined by host Fiona Bruce and guest Dale Vince, the green energy entrepreneur, to correct the veterans minister wrongly suggesting the Labour Party was funded by climate protestors, Just Stop Oil.
Gets his facts totally wrong then just doubles down with more lies – as if a donor giving money to two organisations is the same as the organisations funding each other.
Mercer said: “You’re funded by Just Stop Oil, right? Which you’re not gonna give back.”
Philipson replied: “What are you talking about? That is categorically untrue.”
Mercer then tried to argue Vance donated to Just Stop Oil and some Labour politicians, including leader Keir Starmer.
“Facts matter,” Bruce interjected, as she pointed out this was not the same as Just Stop Oil funding the Labour Party.
Advertisement
“Would you like to set the record straight now, Johnny,” asked Philipson.
He was also slapped down after misinterpreting Labour’s position on the NHS.
During a question about the NHS, as the service marks its 75th anniversary, Philipson made the case for the NHS remaining free at the point of need – meaning the public has access to healthcare regardless of whether they can afford it at that moment or not.
She said: “I believe the principle of access free at the point of need is what has built the NHS, and made it so great, that we know that however much you’ve got in your bank account you can get the care you need, or you should be able to get the care you need at the point at which you need it.”
She added: “The sad reality is after 13 years of the Conservatives, that isn’t the case for people right now.”
But the point was was later given a different spin by Mercer.
The Plymouth MP said: “I mean, this idea that Bridget came out with, it depends how much money you’ve got in your bank account, whether you get served in A&E, is obviously garbage.”
Philipson swiftly responded: “That wasn’t the point I was making. You’re misrepresenting my position.”
Advertisement
Mercer continued: “You did say it depends how much money you’ve got as to how quickly you get treated.”
Philipson continued that she apologised if she “misspoke”, adding: “The point I was making was that it shouldn’t depend on how much you have in your bank account, whether you get access to healthcare.”
She ended the back and forth by saying: “Your government has broken the NHS and now you quibble about semantics.”
Johnny mercer needing an instant fact check 🤦♀️
Makes up some LaLa land story that Bridget Phillipson said it depends how much money you have in the bank whether you can get seen in A&E 🤔
Johnny Mercer says on BBCQT that the govt brought in “the living wage”. That’s not actually true, it brought in the national living wage, which is slightly lower than the rate calculated by @LivingWageUK & only applies if you are 23 and over
What the fuck was Johnny Mercer talking about? Christ this babbling display reminded me of the time my mate brought his estate agent colleague to the afters, except worse because THIS guy is supposed to be a minister!
The Tory MP was later accused of “shouting across every member of the panel tonight” by an audience member.
Mercer on the show stood by his jibe at critics of “collective bed-wetting” after the backlash he faced for saying armed forces personnel don’t need to use food banks.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who is running for the Democratic nomination for president, wants to stand out from ordinary politicians. So this week he posted a video of himself doing shirtless pushups in a parking lot — you know, as potential presidents do!
The 69-year-old son of Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of former President John F. Kennedy showed off his physique in a clip that has been viewed over 15 million times. “Get yourself in shape for a Kennedy Presidency!” he tweeted.
Advertisement
His workout in nothing but jeans at a Gold’s Gym in Venice Beach, California ― a mecca for muscleheads ― drew tons of favorable news coverage and served as an implicit contrast to 80-year-old Joe Biden, the oldest president in U.S. history.
It’s debatable whether American voters are longing for a set of rippling pecs in the Oval Office. But the prominent vaccine skeptic isn’t the first politician to flex their muscles as a way to boost their image or project strength to voters. For many politicians, displays of physical prowess can be a way to fend off questions about their age, set themselves apart in a crowded field, or even just make themselves seem more relatable or charismatic ― though it doesn’t necessarily work.
Does anyone remember the historic candidacy of John Delaney?
The former Democratic congressman from Maryland ran for president in 2020 and tried to distinguish himself from the crowded primary field in part by sharing videos of himself doing pushups and deadlifts in tight T-shirts. Delaney was jacked as hell. But it did nothing for his campaign. He ended his run just days before the Iowa caucuses.
Advertisement
The desire to be seen as a musclehead over an egghead isn’t limited to the younger congressional set. The longest-serving Republican senator in U.S. history, 89-year-old Chuck Grassley, has often played up his exercise habits in campaign ads.
In 2021, the Iowa Republican and then-44-year-old Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) did a 22-pushup demonstration ― though some might say they were half-pushups ― to raise awareness about suicide among military servicemembers. And in 2017, an 83-year-old Grassley challenged a much-younger reporter to a pushup contest and matched his number with 25.
But being buff doesn’t bring invincibility. After winning an eighth Senate term last year, Grassley broke his hip doing what he called “a stupid maneuver in my kitchen” that briefly put him in a wheelchair. The sprightly senator is back to taking stairs at the Capitol, but recently said he’s not yet running again.
This is not a new phenomenon. The late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.), marked his 65th birthday by doing 101 pushups, then another for the photographers.
Bettmann via Getty Images
The president of the United States is another fan of proposing feats of strength when challenged over his age ― though he doesn’t follow through. In 2019, during a tense exchange with an Iowa voter who told the then-77-year-old he was too old for the presidency, Biden threw down the gauntlet.
Advertisement
“You want to check my shape, let’s do pushups together. Let’s run. Let’s do whatever you want to do,” Biden told the man, who was 83 himself and apparently did not take up the offer from the now-president, who has a stiffened gait and has tripped and fallen in public.
The same year, Biden jokingly said he would challenge Donald Trump to a pushup match. He even suggested wrestling a HuffPost reporterin response to a question about voters’ concerns over his health. “What the hell ‘concerns,’ man? You wanna wrestle?” (For the record: We’re still waiting, Mr. President).
Other politicians simply love to share videos of themselves working out, particularly new members of Congress.
In February, Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) posted a video of himself bench-pressing 405 pounds, which is a lot. He told HuffPost at the time that his eventual goal was to do the same weight for two repetitions. (It’s called the House of Reps, after all.)
Rep. Sharice Davids (D-Kan.), then a member-elect, did pushups on Capitol Hill in 2018.
Susan Walsh/Associated Press
Advertisement
It’s not just dudes, either. In 2019, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) posted a video of herself doing pushups alongside a fellow member as a way to blow off steam between hearings. In February, conspiracy theorist Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) showed off some butterfly pull-ups, which look incredibly weird to anyone unfamiliar with CrossFit.
And never forget the, dare we say, iconic 2012 Time Magazine photo shoot of then-Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan demonstrating some bicep curls in a backward hat with a moody blue backdrop, possibly some of the most awkward “gym bro” images of all time.
Of course, there are other ways to show your fixation on masculinity. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) this year published a book titled “Manhood,” calling on American men “to stand up and embrace their God-given responsibility as husbands, fathers, and citizens.” The Missouri Republican argues masculinity isn’t so “inherently problematic” as liberals make it out to be. (The book doesn’t say how many pushups Hawley can do.)
As if to provide a counterpoint, Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) this week challenged a combative committee witness to an actual cage match. The witness, a union president who called Mullin a “greedy CEO” and a “clown,” did not accept the challenge within Mullin’s three-day time period, so the two will have to continue fighting with words. It’s probably an improvement on the historical way of settling disputes in the upper chamber: duels with pistols.
Of course, after pride comes the fall — particularly on Twitter. Even though he looks buff, Kennedy betrayed weakness in the face of Twitter users who wondered why he seemed to struggle to do only eight-and-a-half pushups in his video.
Advertisement
“I can do more than 10 pushups,” he assured them. “That was my last set.”
Then-Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) did 46 pushups in 2014 as part of a bet payoff over hockey.
Steve Barclay was left squirming by Sophy Ridge as he failed to explain how the Tories will pay for a major NHS spending boost.
The Sky News presenter repeatedly asked the health secretary where the £2.4 billion to recruit thousands more doctors and nurses will come from.
Rishi Sunak unveiled the long-awaited NHS workforce plan on Friday.
Asked by Ridge how the government would find the money, Barclay would only say it would be “through the Treasury” but refused to give any specifics.
Ridge responded: “What does that mean though? Is that more money for your department or are you going to have to find it from existing NHS budgets or is it borrowing? Where is it coming from?”
In a rambling answer, Barclay said: “This is additional money, it will be announced in the usual way through fiscal events.”
Ridge hit back: “I haven’t heard any new tax rises or spending cuts so I’m assuming it sounds like it must be extra borrowing.
″A hundred per cent of GDP – that the current level of debt. Interest rates rising, so the cost of servicing debt is going up – is that really responsible?
“If Labour announced a policy of £2.4 billion without saying where that money was coming from you would be after them like a rocket.”
Barclay said the policy would also improve the retention of NHS staff, thereby saving money on hiring agency workers.
Appearing on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg last weekend, Rishi Sunak said the government must “hold our nerve” in the quest to bring down inflation, even if it means higher interest rates for a while.
However, his comments were interpreted as a message to the country at large, that we all just have to suck up higher mortgage and rent costs, on top of rising food and energy bills, until things get better at some point in the future.
Advertisement
Coming from any prime minister that would be a tough political message to sell; coming from one as personally wealthy – and mortgage-free – as Sunak, it is even tougher.
And while politicians’ personal financial circumstances are usually off-limits, the PM’s opponents spot a major weakness and are beginning to take advantage.
At prime minister’s questions on Wednesday, SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn asked Sunak: “May I ask him, the near billionaire, when was the last time that he struggled to pay a bill?”
The fact that he completely avoided answering the question merely confirmed how uncomfortable this topic is for the PM.
Advertisement
Labour leader Keir Starmer also made a point of mentioning this week that his own mortgage has gone up – a less-than-subtle invitation for voters to compare his situation with that of the prime minister.
Gabriel Milland, partner for research at Portland Communications, has carried out focus groups across the country, gauging the views of ordinary voters on the main issues of the day. His findings are a mixed bag for Sunk.
“Generally speaking, it’s not as if voters have a problem with Sunak being wealthy per se,” he told HuffPost UK.
“You have to remember that the kind of salaries that all MPs, let alone frontbenchers, earn places them far above average or median earnings. To most people, all politicians are very well off.
“Where it does become a problem is if politicians appear to be trying to be something that they are not. Boris Johnson never made any bones about the fact that he is, relatively speaking, very posh. Even working class voters accepted him for that.
Advertisement
“What absolutely did cut through in the groups last year was the incident with the contactless payment card and and when he filled up a car with petrol and it turned out not to be his.”
Milland added: “There’s a danger of over-stating all this though. What the public absolutely do want is the sense that the government on their side and doing stuff to help them.
“They’re not that bothered if Sunak himself is facing the same sort of worries over his gas bill that they are.”
However, a senior Labour source said that their own focus groups suggest voters can make the distinction between a PM who is wealthy but seemingly in touch with their concerns – like David Cameron – and one whose unimaginable fortune means he has no idea about ordinary people’s lives.
“We’ve always tried to avoid doing stuff on him being rich, but gradually we’ve started to pick up that people see him as being out of touch,” he told HuffPost UK.
Advertisement
“In focus groups we gets lots of ‘he’s a billionaire’ and ‘he’s part of the jet set elite’.”
Another added: “Someone who’s grown up within the wealth that surrounds him and always has done can’t possibly understand what it’s like for somebody like me.”
The Labour source said that rather than directly attack Sunak’s wealth, they want to convince the public that he’s out of touch with their concerns.
“It’s not how much money that’s in his bank account that matters, it’s things like the US green card, his wife’s non-dom status and him flying round the country in a helicopter,” they said.
“It builds up a picture of someone who’s out of touch and doesn’t have any idea of how you live your life.”
Advertisement
Sunak has been criticised for his preference for private jets rather than train travel
No10 Downing Street
Sunak’s huge personal fortune is at least some comfort for him after another dreadful few days in Number 10.
It was supposed to be ‘NHS week’, when the government set out how it would tackle the many problems facing the health service and culminating in the long-awaited workforce plan setting out a strategy to recruit more doctors and nurses.
Rumours are rife that the PM might try to reset his government with a pre-summer recess reshuffle in what many will see as a last-ditch attempt to save a premiership that is barely eight months old.
Advertisement
As one gloomy Tory aide observed: “There can’t be any more wheels to fall off of this particular shit wagon.”