Foreign secretary David Lammy has warned Vladimir Putin that the UK is “coming after” Russia after its “clumsy, ineffective” means to stoke unrest among Brits.
The government unveiled a new raft of sanctions on Monday against three Russian agencies and three senior figures whom, it alleges, have been trying to “undermine democracy” and support for Ukraine.
Advertisement
These new punishments come days after Putin dismissed any claims of Russian interference as “utter rubbish”.
According to the foreign office, a Russian PR firm, Social Design Agency (SDA) is funded by the Russian state along with partner company Structura.
Western officials believe these companies, along with several other PR firms, have “attempted to deliver a series of interference operations designed to undermine democracy and weaken international support for Ukraine”.
The companies reportedly attempted to incite protests in six European countries this year through bots and fake sites, although their efforts have “consistently struggled online”.
Advertisement
SDA was then forced to “consider buying social media views”, according to the UK.
Lammy said: “Putin is so desperate to undermine European support for Ukraine he is now resorting to clumsy, ineffective efforts to try and stoke unrest.”
The senior cabinet minister said these sanctions “send a clear message” to Moscow that the UK “will not tolerate your lies and interference and we are coming after you”.
He added: “Putin’s desperate attempts to divide us will fail.
“We will constrain the Kremlin, and stand with Ukraine for as long as it takes.”
The US, EU, Canada and Australia have also announced action against the SDA today.
He said: “While the Russian military grinds away on the battlefield at horrendous human cost, Putin’s henchmen are seeking to strike elsewhere in the misguided hope of weakening Western resolve.”
The very drawn-out Conservative Party leadership contest is almost over – but who will be the victor?
The party members have until October 31 to cast their votes, and, having stayed on as a rather reticent caretaker leader for almost four months, Rishi Sunak will finally be able to hand over the reins of the party on November 2.
Advertisement
Former home secretary James Cleverly, perceived as a moderate within the party, was unexpectedly ousted in the last round of the MPs’ ballots earlier this month.
The final two candidates are now right-wing, former ministers, Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick, both of whom are known for regularly causing a stir.
So, as a new era looms for the beleaguered Conservative Party, here’s a look at the most eye-catching moments from the last leadership hopefuls standing during a rather chaotic contest…
Kemi Badenoch
1. Her row with David Tennant
Badenoch launched her leadership bid by reminding Tory members how actor David Tennant had called for her to “shut up” over her belief on the trans community earlier this year.
Advertisement
In a video promoting her plan to lead the Conservatives, Badenoch said: “No, I will not shut up.
“When you have that kind of cultural establishment trying to keep Conservatives down, you need someone like me, who is not afraid of Doctor Who or whoever, and who is going to take the fight to them and not let them try and keep us down.
“That’s not going to happen with me.”
2. Claiming maternity pay is “excessive”
The Tory leadership hopeful sparked a row at the Conservative Party conference when she told Times Radio: “Maternity pay varies depending on who you work for, but it is a function, where it’s statutory maternity pay. It is a function of tax.
“Tax comes from people who are working. We’re taking from one group of people and giving to another. This in my view is excessive.”
She later had to issue a “clarification” saying she was actually talking about “the burden of regulation on businesses”.
3. Alleging people are “too scared” to start businesses
Badenoch doubled down on her concerns over business during the conference.
At a fringe event, recalling how a constituent explained she had to close her business because she could not afford wages or maternity pay, Badenoch claimed: “We are overburdening businesses.
Advertisement
“We are overburdening them with regulation, with tax. People aren’t starting businesses any more because they’re too scared.”
4. Suggesting young Tories get marked down at university because of politics
While at the conference, Badenoch said “socialism” has returned to the UK now Labour are in power.
She said young Conservatives are now “afraid to share their politics with other students, because they will be attacked, that they are marked down by lecturers because of their beliefs”.
5. Claiming a tenth of civil servants should be “in prison”
Again, while speaking to the party faithful, Badenoch said 10% of civil servants are “absolutely magnificent”.
But she added: “There’s about 5 to 10% of them who are very, very bad – you know, should be in prison bad – leaking official secrets, undermining their ministers, agitating – I have some of it in my department – usually union led.”
The audience laughed after she spoke, suggesting it may have been a joke.
6. Suggesting not all “cultures are equally valid”
Badenoch wrote an article for the Sunday Telegraph saying “we cannot be naive and assume […] all cultures are equally valid” as “they are not”.
Advertisement
She added: “I am struck, for example, by the number of recent immigrants to the UK who hate Israel.”
7. Huge fan of Elon Musk
Badenoch revealed she is a supporter of the world’s richest man, Elon Musk.
She said: “I think Elon Musk has been a fantastic thing for freedom of speech. I will hold my hand up and say, I’m a huge fan of Elon Musk.”
Her comments came weeks after the X CEO suggested “civil war was inevitable” in the UK during the far-right riots and repeated the right-wing conspiracy theory of two-tier policing.
8. A controversial take on class
Speaking on Christopher Hope’s Political Podcast, Badenoch claimed: “I grew up in a middle class family, but I became working class when I was 16, working in McDonald’s.”
9. “I don’t make gaffes”
Shortly after that remark about class, Badenoch told the podcast: “I never have gaffes, or apologising for something that I said, [saying] ‘oh that’s not what I meant,’ I never have to clarify, because I think very carefully about what I say.”
10. Endorsing a pamphlet “stigmatising” autism
Badenoch wrote the foreword for the ‘Conservatism in Crisis’ report which said an autism diagnosis “offers economic advantages and protections”.
Advertisement
She claimed “mental health has become something that society, schools and employers have to work around”.
Conservative leadership candidates Kemi Badenoch, from left, Robert Jenrick
via Associated Press
Robert Jenrick
1. A strong interest in Thatcher
The Tory leadership hopeful told the Conservative Party conference he gave his daughter “Thatcher” as a middle name in a reference to the late prime minister.
Jenrick told The Sunday Times that he wonders if the head of the NHS in England, Amanda Pritchard, is “the best person Britain has to run the NHS”.
Advertisement
He said: “It’s nothing personal against her. I know she’s very professional. But I do think it’s time for someone new, who gets that NHS productivity has to improve.”
3. His remarks on the SAS
As part of his claim about the ways the ECHR restricts the UK, Jenrick used footage of an SAS soldier, who has since died, in northern Afghanistan in around 2002 in one of his campaign videos.
Jenrick sparked backlash when he claimed: “Our special forces are killing rather than capturing terrorists because our lawyers tell us that if they are caught, the European court will set them free.”
4. Wearing a ‘Hamas are terrorists’ hoodie
Jenrick was pictured wearing a “Hamas are terrorists” hoodie at a Conservative Friends of Israel meeting.
5. UK has to leave the ECHR or the Tories ‘die’
The former immigration minister suggested the UK had to leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), or die, because of the way it restricts how immigration is tackled.
Advertisement
He said: “This is more than just ‘leave or amend’: frankly, our party doesn’t have a future unless we take a stand and fix this problem. It’s leave or die for our party – I’m for leave.”
6. Installing the Star of David at UK ports
Jenrick told a fringe event at the Tory conference: “A small thing that I fought for when I was the immigration minister was to ensure that every Israeli citizen could enter our country through the e-gate, through the easy access.
“So that at every airport and point of entry to our great country there is the Star of David there as a symbol that we support Israel, we stand with Israel.”
7. Support for Trump
“If I were an American citizen, I would be voting for Donald Trump,” he said in August.
However he watered these comments down a bit later, saying he does not agree with everything the Republican candidate says and “respects” Kamala Harris.
8. Promoting “English identity”
In an article for the Daily Mail, Jenrick wrote: “The combination of unprecedented migration alongside the dismantling of our national culture, non-integrating multiculturalism and the denigration of our identity has presented huge problems.”
Advertisement
He added: “It has had a clear impact on our culture, customs and cohesion. Taken together, the attitudes and policies of our metropolitan establishment have weakened English identity. They have put the very idea of England at risk.”
However, he was unable to explain exactly what he meant when pressed over his wording on Sky News.
9. Claiming anyone shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ in the street should be arrested
Speaking to Sky News about the August riots, Jenrick said: “I have been very critical of the police in the past, particularly around the attitude of some police forces to the protests since October 7 [Hamas’ attack on Israel.]
“I thought it was quite wrong somebody could shout Allahu Akbar on the streets of London and not be immediately arrested, or project genocidal chants onto Big Ben, and that person not be immediately arrested.”
He later defended himself, saying he was talking about “aggressive chanting” of the phrase.
10. Forgetting what he did while Home Office minister
Jenrick claimed the current PM Keir Starmer “signed us up to eight more years of uncontrolled levels of illegal migrants” after the government invited companies to manage the Western Jet Foil and Manston facilities.
Actually, the leadership hopeful signed off on those contracts himself when he was the immigration minister.
It is not an overstatement to say that this week’s Budget is likely to be the most consequential event of this parliament.
Every decision the government makes between now and the next general election, for good or ill, will be influenced in some way by what Rachel Reeves announces at lunchtime on Wednesday. No pressure then, chancellor.
Advertisement
This is what we know so far. The Budget – called ‘Fixing The Foundations To Deliver Change’ – seeks to raise £40 billion, the vast majority of it through tax rises plus some spending cuts, including £3 billion from the welfare bill.
With Labour having promised not to increase taxes on “working people” before the election, income tax, VAT and the employees’ rate of National Insurance are all off-limits.
That means Reeves has her eyes on inheritance tax, capital gains tax, pension allowances and – most controversially – the employers’ rate of NI to help her balance the books.
A Treasury source told HuffPost UK: “We are dealing with the £22 billion hole in the public finances left by the Tories, and it’s worth stressing that is this year, next year, the year after that and the year after that. It’s a huge problem and we’ve got to address it.
Advertisement
“What we are doing is resetting the public finances and putting them on a firmer footing.
“We’re also acutely aware that we were elected on a platform of change. People voted to change things and for things to get a little bit better. So there will be more money for the NHS to cut waiting lists and more money for long-term investments like building schools, roads and other infrastructure.”
To that end, the chancellor announced on Thursday that she is changing the way the government measures debt, thereby allowing her to borrow an extra £50bn while still sticking to her pledge to bring overall debt down.
That money will be ploughed into public services which, Reeves claims, the Tories were planning to starve of the funds they need.
However, a poll carried out by Savanta and seen by HuffPost UK will make for worrying reading for the chancellor as she puts the finishing touches to her Budget speech in No.11 this weekend.
It shows that 48% of voters believe she should prioritise cutting taxes, compared to 43% who would rather see more money for public services.
Advertisement
However, more than half (55%) say it is more important for the government to invest in public services, with 32% saying it should be cut.
Meanwhile, just 20% of people believe the Budget will have a positive impact, with older people particularly gloomy about what it will mean for them – a result, most likely, of the row over the means testing of the winter fuel allowance.
A total of 80% of of over-55s think it will have a negative impact on their finances, compared to just 6% who believe it will be positive.
Those aged between 18 and 34 are more optimistic, however, with 40% thinking the Budget will be positive for them, with 28% taking the opposite view.
Even Labour supporters appear to be dreading Wednesday, with 41% of those who voted for the party in July believing it will be negative for them, compared to 33% who think it will be positive.
Advertisement
Emma Levin, associate director at Savanta, said: “Significant swathes of the electorate are bracing themselves for Labour’s first budget in 15 years.
“In particular older people appear nervous, amid rumours of many wealth taxes rises, compared to a relatively sanguine younger population.
“Concerningly for Rachel Reeves, even Labour voters think the Budget is going to have a negative impact on their lives. This may be exactly the mood music Labour HQ is going for ahead of a ‘painful budget’, but it’s clear the public want investment in public services as a priority.”
Nevertheless, allies of the chancellor remain confident that the measures announced in the Budget will eventually pay off both economically and politically.
One said: “It will be an honest Budget. Rachel will be very clear that we’re not going to be able to fix 14 years of failure in one Budget.
Advertisement
“This is a 10-year project. She’s having to make difficult decisions now to deliver long-term growth and prosperity.”
With the new Tory leader being announced just three days later, senior Labour figures also see the Budget as effectively the start of the next general election campaign.
“It will set out the clear divide for the whole parliament,” one Treasury source told HuffPost UK.
“Do we either do nothing, stick with the status quo, continue with more austerity, more cuts and more decline, or do we change and do things differently, asking those with the broadest shoulders to pay a bit more tax and start investing in long-term projects?
“This is where it will start to get difficult for the Tories.”
Rachel Reeves has unveiled plans to spend billions of pounds on the UK’s infrastructure after changing the way the government measures debt.
In a major shift in policy ahead of next week’s Budget, the chancellor said the move would allow her to “begin to fix the NHS and start to rebuild our economy”.
Advertisement
She also confirmed that taxes will go up to fund the government’s day-to-day spending commitments – and that areas like the welfare budget will face cuts.
Labour’s election manifesto promised that debt would be falling as a share of the economy at the end of five years.
By changing the way that government debt is measured, Reeves hopes to release an extra £50 billion to spend on long-term projects.
The chancellor said: “My fiscal rules will do two things. The first and most important: my stability rule will mean that day-to-day spending will be matched by revenues.
Advertisement
“Given the state of the public finances and the need to invest in our public services, this rule will bite hardest.
“Alongside tough decisions on spending and welfare, that means taxes will need to rise to ensure this rule is met. I will always protect working people when I make these choices, while taking a balanced approach.”
She added: “My second fiscal rule, the investment rule, will get debt falling as a proportion of our economy.
“That will make space for increased investment in the fabric of our economy, and ensure we don’t see the falls in public sector investment that were planned under the last government.”
Reeves also told ITV News: “Our second rule, our investment rule, will change the way in which we measure government debt so we take into account our assets, not just the costs of investment.”
Advertisement
But Jeremy Hunt said civil servants had warned him against such a move when he was chancellor because of the risks it posed to economic stability.
He said: “The consistent advice I received from Treasury officials was always that increasing borrowing meant interest rates would be higher for longer – and punish families with mortgages.
“What’s even more remarkable is that the chancellor hasn’t seen fit to announce this major change to the fiscal rules to parliament. The markets are watching.”
A Labour spokesperson said: “Labour will not take any lectures from the Tories on how to run the economy. It was Liz Truss and the Conservatives that crashed the economy, which sent mortgages soaring and left the British people worse off.
“Jeremy Hunt and the Tories should be apologising to country for the economic mess they left – with a £22 billion blackhole in the public finances and public services on their knees.”
Advertisement
“Labour’s Budget will fix the foundations of our economy and deliver the change people voted for.”
Vladimir Putin has finally responded to the international claims he spoke to Donald Trump on multiple occasions after the latter left the Oval Office.
Journalist Bob Woodward claimed in his new book War that, according to a former White House aide, “there have been multiple phone calls between Trump and Putin, maybe as many as seven in the period since Trump left the White House in 2021”.
Advertisement
Trump’s campaign said the claims were completely fabricated. His spokesperson replied: “None of these made up stories by Bob Woodward are true and are the work of a truly demented and deranged man who suffers from a debilitating case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
Putin has just replied to Woodward’s claim, which were first reported on October 8, today.
Responding to a reporter’s question at the BRICS conference in Kazan, the Russian president said: “It’s nonsense.”
He continued: “But when Trump says that he wants to put an end to the war in Ukraine, I think that he is sincere.”
The former US president has sparked concerns among Western officials over his stance towards the conflict.
Advertisement
He has repeatedly said he wants the war to end but has refused to say who he wants to win, suggesting he may force Ukraine to cede land to Moscow.
Putin did use the press conference to confirm that he is in contact with the North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, over potentially deploying troops to fight alongside Russia.
Alluding to his defence pact with Pyongyang, he said: “We ratified the treaty on strategic partnership which contains Article 4 and we have never shied away from the fact that North Korea is serious about its commitment to us.
“It’s up to us how we implement Article 4. We are in contact with our North Korean partners.”
According to The Telegraph, he also chuckled when asked about troops already being deployed to fight in Russia, before adding: “The satellite images you spoke of, this is a serious allegation.
“It means that something is happening, but let me tell you one thing, it wasn’t the actions of Russia that led to the escalation in Ukraine.”
Advertisement
It’s widely believed that Moscow invaded Ukraine and tried to seize Kyiv in 2022 in a land grab, although Putin blames NATO’s eastward expansion.
Donald Trump’s claim that Labour is guilty of “blatant foreign interference” in the presidential election has been virtually ignored in America, it has emerged.
One senior US-based journalist claimed “nobody gives a shit” about the complaint his campaign team lodged on Tuesday night.
Advertisement
In it, they accused Labour of recruiting activists to send across the Atlantic to campaign for Trump’s Democrat rival, Kamala Harris.
The Republican nominee’s team also pointed out that Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, and his director of communications, Matthew Doyle, “attended a convention in Chicago and met with Ms Harris’s campaign team”.
The complaint to the US Federal Election Commission stems from a now-deleted LinkedIn post by Labour’s head of operations Sofia Patel, which claimed almost 100 current and former party officials were heading to campaign for the Democrats in battleground states.
He said: “I spent time in New York with President Trump, had dinner with him and my purpose in doing that was to make sure that between the two of us, we established a good relationship, which we did, and we’re grateful for him for making the time.
“We had a good, constructive discussion, and, of course as prime minster of the United Kingdom I will work with whoever the American people return as their president in their elections which are very close now.”
Starmer also insisted that UK political activists travelling to America to campaign in presidential elections is nothing new.
He added: ”“Of course as prime minister of the United Kingdom, I will work with whoever the American people return as their president in the elections that are very close now.”
Daniel Knowles, Midwest correspondent at the highly-respected Economist magazine, insisted the story had barely registered in the US.
Advertisement
Writing on Bluesky, he said: “Sorry but nobody in America gives a shit about a few Labour activists door-knocking or whatever. The Trump complaint is entirely cynical, and one of dozens of random speculative press releases I was sent yesterday. I’m not surprised British media is as ever just fucking delighted for a local angle.
“The story here isn’t ‘is door knocking actually an illegal contribution’ etc. The legitimate UK angle to cover is, ‘Donald Trump will pick massive fights with the British government over nothing if it wins him a nice headline’. Which we know, from his conduct in office.”
Sorry but nobody in America gives a shit about a few Labour activists door-knocking or whatever. The Trump complaint is entirely cynical, and one of dozens of random speculative press releases I was sent yesterday. I’m not surprised British media is as ever just fucking delighted for a local angle
Shadow Scottish secretary John Lamont described the controversy as “a diplomatic car crash by this Labour government”.
He said: “There’s now somebody who could potentially be the next president of the United States who’s lodged an official complaint with the American authorities about the Labour party, the Labour government, and their involvement in their election.
Advertisement
“If Donald Trump were to win for the election in a few weeks, how on earth is the prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, going to rebuild that relationship with one of the most important countries in the world, not least from a diplomatic perspective, but also from a trading perspective?”
A Labour Party spokesperson said: “It is common practice for campaigners of all political persuasions from around the world to volunteer in US elections.
“Where Labour activists take part, they do so at their own expense, in accordance with the laws and rules.”
Gauke, who was justice secretary himself when Theresa May was prime minister, will report his findings next spring.
The sentencing review comes in the wake of the crisis which saw the government release thousands of prisoners early to free up space in England’s jails.
Gauke, who was one of 21 Tory MPs stripped of the party whip by Boris Johnson after rebelling over Brexit, said: “Clearly, our prisons are not working.
“The prison population is increasing by around 4,500 every year, and nearly 90% of those sentenced to custody are reoffenders.
Advertisement
“This review will explore what punishment and rehabilitation should look like in the 21st century, and how we can move our justice system out of crisis and towards a long-term, sustainable future.”
Gauke, who stood as an independent at the 2019 election but lost his seat to the Conservatives, has previously said that prison sentences of less than six months should be scrapped.
The review will look at “tough alternatives to custody” while also ensuring the worst offenders continue to be locked up, the Ministry of Justice said.
Mahmood said the review “will ensure we never again have more prisoners than prison spaces”.
She said: “I believe in punishment. I believe in prison, but I also believe that we must increase the range of punishments we use. And that those prisoners who earn the right to turn their lives around should be encouraged to do so.
“The sentencing review will make sure prison and punishment work – and that there is always a cell waiting for dangerous offenders.”
Former President Barack Obama said he gave ex-President Donald Trump a pandemic playbook when Trump took office — but he disregarded it.
“He ignored it,” Obama said during a rally for Vice President Kamala Harris in Las Vegas on Saturday. “And three years later, a pandemic hits.”
He said the Covid-19 pandemic was a “generational pandemic” and that any president would have had a hard time before noting how the United States’ death rate compared to countries like Canada that responded proactively to the global outbreak.
“But if you look at a country like Canada, their per capita death rate was 40% lower than it was here in the United States. So just do the math. That’s more than 400,000 people,” Obama said. “People’s grandmothers, people’s fathers, people’s moms who would have been alive if Donald Trump had just paid attention and tried to follow the plan that we gave him.”
He continued, saying it does matter and makes a difference to have a president who is “competent,” “cares about you” and “listens to people who are experts in these areas.”
“If you hear somebody say it doesn’t matter, it does matter,” Obama added. “And at some point, it will make a difference to them.”
In early 2020, then-Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Republican, Kentucky) claimed that the Obama administration didn’t leave any pandemic playbook. Soon after that, Ronald Klain, the White House Ebola response coordinator from October 2014 to February 2015, posted the playbook on social media, while Nicole Lurie, an Obama administration official, confirmed its existence.
The Russian ambassador to the UK has claimed there was one aspect of the Ukraine war which is “worrying” the Kremlin.
Speaking to the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Andrey Kelin slammed Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s supposed “victory plan,” which he has been presenting to Western allies, suggesting it was a concern.
Advertisement
The ambassador claimed: “What is worrying us is there is no peace in the peace plan presented by Zelenskyy. He did not want peace negotiations.
“He continues to ask for more and more Nato, European Union assistance, defence packages, anything. But nothing about negotiations at all.”
Ukraine has made it clear the war is not over until it reclaims all of its land from Russia, including Crimea, which was annexed in 2014.
But Moscow says it will only end the war when it can officially claim the Ukrainian land it currently occupies.
Advertisement
When Kuenssberg pointed out that Zelenskyy has said he will not negotiate with the Kremlin, Kelin smiled and said: “Fine, then he will lose more and more terrain.”
Russia currently occupies around 18% of Ukraine’s entire territory.
Ukraine did turn the tables and seize a comparably small Russian region called Kursk in August, but its troops are now slowly losing ground.
She said: “Are you comfortable, as an experienced diplomat of many decades, with having to rely on support from pariah states like North Korea and Iran?”
He said: “For you perhaps, it is pariah states – for us, it is normal people.”
The ambassador added that just because those countries have “different views” should not stop Russia having a relationship with them.
Advertisement
Kuenssberg then suggested: “Isn’t the truth here that you and Vladimir Putin are both sitting in grand luxury refusing to budge while thousands of civilians – Russians and Ukrainians – are suffering as a result of this conflict, which your government could bring to an end and yet you persist with it?”
He said the UK and its allies could end the war if they stopped aiding Ukraine, adding: “Stop the armament supplies, do it!”
As Kelin insisted that the war was not putting a strain on Russia, Kuenssberg then changed tactic, and asked: “Does the suffering in this war ever keep you awake at night?”
He said: “No one likes the war, and we stand for the quickest diplomatic and political settlement.”
When she asked her question again, he said: “Yes, well, sometimes I feel like and I anticipate the end of it, the quickest end of it. And I hope it will end sometime.”
Kelin also used the interview to claim the UK is waging a proxy war against Russia by supporting Ukraine, even though Putin ordered the invasion of the neighbouring European country back in 2022.
Advertisement
“You think we’re at war with your country?” Kuenssberg pushed.
He replied: “I think you are aggressive, that you are waging a proxy war against Russia.”
He also claimed Zelenskyy is “desperate” and “losing the conflict”.
“The end of this phase will mean the end of Ukraine,” he said, adding: “Defeat, over the course, is in view.”
As expected, Kelin’s comments were quite at odds with the most recent message coming from the UK government about the war.
Labour also promised before the election not to increase taxes for “working people”, particularly when it comes to VAT, income tax and National Insurance contributions.
In a clash with health secretary Wes Streeting, presenter Phillips asked how the “working people” label applies to the self-employed.
“Of course self-employed people are working people,” the cabinet minister replied, adding that when he thinks about the term, he means those who are on “low to middle incomes”.
Streeting said that they have a “different working arrangement”.
The presenter asked: “So just in the same way you told us there would be no rise in National Insurance, but suddenly there’s rises in National Insurance for employers, it’s just possible there might be rises in taxes for the self-employed, because they’re not workers?”
The minister replied: “We will keep our manifesto promises, despite the pressures, we will not increase income tax, National Insurance or VAT on working people – that was the commitment we made before the general election.”
Phillips cut in: “Every expert says you’re breaking the pledge.”
The health secretary claimed Labour had been criticised for not being radical enough in their manifesto in the run up to the general election, and that’s because they knew it had to be feasible to deliver on it.
As they spoke over each other, the presenter hit out: “You know what I want to do now? I want to say, I take that answer but terms and conditions apply.”
Advertisement
“What do you mean? Absolutely not,” Streeting said, saying Labour are going to deliver on every pledge they made in their manifesto.
