Connect with us

Startup

Welfare U-turn makes spending decisions harder, Bridget Phillipson says

Published

on

Spread the love

Joshua Nevett

Political reporter

Watch: Bridget Phillipson does not commit to scrapping the two-child benefit cap

Spending decisions have been made “harder” by the government’s U-turn on welfare changes, the education secretary has said, as she did not commit to scrapping the two-child benefit cap.

Bridget Phillipson told BBC One’s Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme that ministers were “looking at every lever” to lift children out of poverty.

But she said removing the cap would “come at a cost” and insisted the government was supporting families with the cost of living in other ways.

It comes after a rebellion of Labour MPs forced the government to significantly water down a package of welfare reforms that would have saved £5bn a year by 2030.

The climbdown means the savings will now be delayed or lost entirely, which puts pressure on Chancellor Rachel Reeves ahead of the autumn Budget.

Before its retreat on benefits, the Labour government was considering lifting the two-child benefit cap, a policy that restricts means-tested benefits to a maximum of two children per family for those born after April 2017.

About 1.6 million children live in households affected by the cap, according to the Department for Work and Pensions.

The Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank estimates that axing the policy would cost the government about £3.4bn a year and would lift 500,000 children out of relative poverty.

When pressed by Kuenssberg on if the chances of getting rid of the cap had diminished, Phillipson said: “The decisions that have been taken in the last week do make decisions, future decisions harder.

“But all of that said, we will look at this collectively in terms of all of the ways that we can lift children out of poverty.”

Phillipson and Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall are leading a child poverty taskforce, which is looking at the case for removing the cap, among other policy options.

The taskforce was expected to publish a strategy for reducing child poverty in the autumn.

The government launched the taskforce last year, at a time when it was being urged by opposition parties and some Labour MPs to scrap the two-child benefit cap.

There is still a big appetite to lift the cap among many Labour backbenchers, especially those who were leading opponents of the planned cuts to welfare.

In May, Phillipson said “nothing is off the table”, when asked whether the government was considering lifting the cap.

But speaking to the Guardian newspaper on Friday, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said she was “not wedded to any specific policy” to reduce child poverty.

In that interview, Reeves said it would be “irresponsible” for a chancellor to rule out tax rises and said “there are costs to what happened” with welfare.

On the Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, Phillipson struck a similar tone.

The cabinet minister said scrapping the two-child benefit cap “does come at a cost and that’s why, in keeping with our fiscal rules, we do need to make sure that we have a strong foundation for the economy”.

Phillipson said while the cap was “an important consideration”, it was “not the only way that we are supporting and will support families”, pointing to the expansion of family hubs, free school meals, breakfast clubs, and childcare.

In a post on X, Labour MP Jon Trickett – who voted against the government’s welfare changes – wrote: “The suggestion that Labour government will leave children in poverty because they couldn’t take welfare benefits from the disabled is truly shocking.”

Conservative shadow chancellor Mel Stride, who also appeared on the programme, said the government had made some “poor choices” and argued more could be done to cut the growing benefits bill.

He said his party would attempt to make changes to the government’s welfare reform bill as it makes its way through Parliament.

One of the party’s amendments would reduce entitlement to disability and health-related benefits for those with less severe mental conditions.

IFS analysis says more than half of the rise in 16-64 year-olds claiming disability benefits since the Covid-19 pandemic is related to mental health or behavioural conditions.

If nothing changes, the health and disability benefits bill is forecast to reach £70bn a year by the end of the decade, a level of spending the government says is “unsustainable”.

The Conservatives have pointed to a report by the Centre for Social Justice, which argued cutting mental health benefits for all but the worst cases would save £7.4bn per year by 2030.

“We believe, particularly when it comes to mental health, one of the best solutions to those kinds of challenges is work,” Stride said.

“We are the party that believes in work. We don’t believe that welfare should trap people.”

Startup

Jaguar Land Rover to cut up to 500 UK management jobs

Published

on

By

Spread the love

Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) is to cut up to 500 management jobs in the UK, as the carmaker faces pressure on sales and profits from US trade tariffs.

JLR said it would launch a voluntary redundancy scheme, and that the cuts were not expected to exceed 1.5% of its British workforce. The firm described the move as “normal business practice”.

Last week, the carmaker revealed a drop in sales in the three months to June caused partly by it pausing exports to the US because of tariffs and also due to the planned wind-down of older Jaguar models.

The company warned last month that US President Donald Trump’s decision to impose a 10% tariff on British cars exported to the US would hit its profits.

JLR said it “regularly offers eligible employees voluntary redundancy” and said the current programme was based on “the business’s current and future needs”.

It added that the UK-US trade deal on car imports gives it “confidence to invest £3.5bn” per year.

Car industry expert Professor David Bailey of the Birmingham Business School said the tariffs “play a big role” in the job cuts.

“It wasn’t that long ago that JLR was reporting bumper profits – £2.5bn profit to the year ending in March – which was its best results in a decade,” he told the BBC’s Wake Up to Money programme.

The firm has also been taking on workers in preparation for producing more electric cars so the tariffs “have definitely had an impact”, he said.

As part of a wave of tariff announcements made by Trump earlier this year, UK exports of UK cars and automotive parts faced an extra 25% tax, on top of an existing 2.5% levy. This led to JLR pausing shipments of its vehicles to the US.

However, the UK-US deal saw the tariff cut to 10% for a maximum of 100,000 UK cars, which matches the number of these vehicles that the UK exported last year.

Despite this, Prof Bailey said the new rate is still “a big increase” from the previous tariff of 2.5%, adding that one of its best selling cars, the Defender, is made in Slovakia and that still faces a 27.5% tariff.

Downing Street rejected “absolutely” any suggestion that JLR’s job cuts were a personal embarrassment for Sir Keir Starmer, who visited the company in May and declared it was his intention to protect British jobs in the car industry.

A spokesperson for the PM said the UK-US trade deal was “jobs saved, not job done”, adding that JLR was “responding to challenging global conditions” in making the cuts.

JLR is a large employer in the UK automotive sector with more than 30,000 workers.

It has sites in Solihull, Wolverhampton and Halewood on Merseyside, and builds Range Rover SUV models in the UK.

Speaking before JLR made its announcement about job cuts, Preet Kaur Gill, Labour MP for Edgbaston in Birmingham, said the UK’s recent trade deal with the US had helped to preserve jobs at the company.

“In my region, Jaguar Land Rover is a really important employer. The fact that we’ve managed to save 12,000 jobs, bring tariffs down… this is an ongoing relationship and our commitment is to make sure we continue that,” she said.

Continue Reading

Startup

Inflation complicates next month’s rate decision

Published

on

By

Spread the love

While the economy started this year strongly, Wednesday saw another example of a surprise to the markets in the wrong direction.

In May the economy slowed again, and now inflation has quickened faster than expected. It is expected to stay well above the Bank of England’s target level until autumn.

For consumers, still reeling from years of higher prices and a recent pickup in food prices, the new number is less a surprise, more the confirmation of their ordinary day-to-day challenges.

On top of that, and just as important for some people, the bounce in inflation complicates the Bank’s rate cut plan.

Investors have been treating it as pretty much nailed on that rates will come down again in August, from the current 4.25%.

Now there is definitely a sense of renewed caution.

A former rate setter at the Bank, the economist Andrew Sentance, even said it would be “irresponsible” for interest rates to be cut next month.

Expectations remain that the cut in August and another one later in the year will go ahead.

But the Bank will have to explain why it is looking beyond this current rise in inflation, into next year’s expected drop-back to the 2% target.

It will mean the return of old questions around whether the UK is more inflation-prone than other countries, for example because of increasing wage and tax costs being passed on in the form of higher prices.

A weakening jobs market is another part of the deliberations. The latest employment figures will be published on Thursday.

If, as expected, they show a continued fall in vacancies, then that strengthens the argument for going ahead with a cut in rates. Bloomberg is predicting a 4.9% unemployment rate, up from the 4.6% reported last month.

But as always it is important to keep all the figures in perspective.

True, other major economies have not seen a similar bounce in inflation. The eurozone’s latest inflation rate is just 2%. But inflation is nowhere near the highs of the energy crisis, and will come down as energy prices fall in the autumn.

Growth is definitely slowing, but we are not in recession, and the very latest activity figures suggest recovery in some sectors.

Continue Reading

Startup

US inflation rises as tariffs drive up prices

Published

on

By

Spread the love

Natalie Sherman

Business reporter, BBC News

Getty Images A hand selects an orange at a grocery storeGetty Images

US inflation jumped last month as President Donald Trump’s tariffs took hold, pushing up prices for items from clothing to coffee.

Consumer prices rose 2.7% in the year to June, up from 2.4% the previous month, with prices rising at the fastest pace since February, the Labor Department said.

Higher energy and housing costs, such as rents, were the major drivers of the increase.

But the data also suggested that consumers are starting to feel the impact of tariffs, as some firms begin to pass along the costs of Trump’s new taxes on imports.

Coffee prices jumped 2.2% from May to June, while prices for citrus fruits climbed 2.3%. Toy prices rose 1.8%, appliance prices increased 1.9%, while clothing prices gained 0.4% – the first increase to hit the sector in months.

But the overall increase remained contained and came in largely within expectations, offset by declines in prices for new and used cars, airfare and hotel bookings.

“There is a trickle of what is likely tariff-induced inflation in some categories, particularly household appliances and furnishings,” said Olu Sonola, head of US economic research at Fitch Ratings.

“This trickle is likely to gain momentum in the coming months.”

The average effective tariff rate in the US has surged this year, as Trump imposed a 10% tax on most goods entering the country, hitting key items, such as steel and car with even higher levies.

Though he suspended some more aggressive plans, in recent weeks, he has said he is planning to raise tariffs on goods from most countries, with duties set to come into effect on 1 August.

The president has claimed that introducing tariffs will protect American businesses from foreign competition and also boost domestic manufacturing and jobs.

The White House has dismissed forecasts that the measures will lead to higher prices for Americans, arguing that companies and foreign exporters will absorb the costs.

That view is at odds with most economic forecasters, who have argued the US economy has been shielded so far because firms stocked up on many goods in advance.

Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics, said the latest figures were unlikely to settle the debate.

Continue Reading

Trending

© 2024 247News.co.in | All Rights Reserved