Friday, May 17, 2024


UK's Labour sets out plans for government


Peter HUTCHISON
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Labour leader Keir Starmer outlined his plan for government (Oli SCARFF)


Britain's main opposition Labour party on Thursday set out its stall for this year's general election with six key pledges to voters in a de facto campaign launch.

The official five-week election campaign only starts when Prime Minister Rishi Sunak names a date. So far, he has only said it will be in the second half of the year.

Nevertheless, both Sunak, who heads the ruling Conservatives, and Labour leader Keir Starmer have switched to campaign mode.

On Monday, Sunak urged voters to keep faith with the Tories even after 14 years in power marked by austerity measures, Brexit, bitter political in-fighting and scandal.

Labour has been consistently polling well ahead of the Conservatives for the last 18 months, putting Starmer on course to become prime minister as the leader of the largest party in parliament.

He laid out Labour's "first steps" for government at an event in Essex, a key battleground area in southeast England.

Starmer promised economic stability, shorter health service waiting times and a new border security command to tackle irregular immigration.

He also vowed to establish a publicly owned clean energy company, crack down on anti-social behaviour with more neighbourhood police and recruit 6,500 new teachers.

"I'm not going to give you gimmicks," said Starmer, who paced the stage in a white shirt, sleeves rolled up.

"There's no quick fix to the mess that the Tories have made of this country. But this is a changed Labour party with a plan to take us forward."

- Labour's 'missions' -

The pledges, largely made before, are intended to add some flesh to the bones of five "missions" Labour says will spur a "decade of national renewal" after four consecutive terms of Tory rule.

Many commentators likened them to the pledge cards brought in by Labour's most successful leader, Tony Blair, whose 10 years as prime minister began with a landslide victory against the Tories in 1997.

They are set to feature on advertising vans and billboards in target constituencies across England in what Labour says is its most expensive ad campaign since the 2019 general election.

At that vote, Labour under the leadership of left-winger Jeremy Corbyn suffered its worst defeat in nearly a century, as Boris Johnson romped home with his promise to "Get Brexit Done".

Starmer, a centrist pro-European former lawyer, has since moved Labour to the centre ground to make the party a more palatable electoral force.

The Conservatives meanwhile have replaced their leader twice, turning on Johnson after his handling of the Covid pandemic and one scandal too many, then forcing out Liz Truss after just 49 days.

Former finance minister Sunak, 44, has sought to repair the damage caused by Truss's disastrous mini-budget of unfunded tax cuts, which spooked financial markets and sank the pound.

But he goes into the election with the Tories' reputation for economic competence tarnished, and riven by ideological splits between moderates and anti-immigration, free market right-wingers.

- 'Tough spending rules' -

Starmer, 61, promised to implement "tough spending rules" to prevent further misery for people who have seen their household budgets squeezed by high inflation and mortgage hikes.

Sunak, who is hoping for better economic conditions by the end of the year, has to hold an election by January 28, 2025. He is using the time to try to keep his party together and revive its fortunes.

On Monday, he warned that Labour would jeopardise UK security, insisting his party could still win the election.

Johnson's predecessor as premier, Theresa May, said Thursday she believed a Labour win "is not a foregone conclusion".

It would require a massive swing to secure a majority, she told reporters, adding that the voters she met were less enthusiastic about Starmer than they were about Blair.

"The view on those doorsteps is different to the feel pre-1997," May insisted.

pdh-phz/jj



Labour Party manifesto 2024: Keir Starmer’s election promises

Amy Gibbons
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Labour Party manifesto 2024: Keir Starmer's likely election promises

Sir Keir Starmer has announced the policies at the heart of his election campaign in the clearest indication yet of what we can expect to see in Labour’s 2024 manifesto.

The Labour leader made six key pledges at a campaign rally in Essex, one each on his five “mission” areas – the economy, energy, crime, education and the NHS – plus a newly added priority on immigration.

Sir Keir and Rachel Reeves, his shadow chancellor, are seeking to position Labour as the fiscally responsible party that would drive growth in Britain, allowing them to invest in public services such as the NHS.

Here The Telegraph sets out the pledges the party is expected to include in its general election manifesto.

NHS and social care


Tax


Economy


Environment, energy and net zero


Education and childcare


Defence


Pensions


Policing and crime


Migration


Housing
NHS and social care

Two million more operations, scans and appointments in first year


Train thousands more doctors, nurses and midwives


Specialist mental health support in every school


Extra 700,000 dentist appointments and supervised tooth brushing for three to five-year-olds


New “neighbourhood health centres” with joined-up services

Labour has pledged to get the NHS “back on its feet” by reforming the health service rather than “pouring ever-increasing amounts of money” into it.

As an “immediate priority”, it would focus on tackling the “massive” waiting list backlog, with an extra two million operations, scans and appointments in the first year. This would be achieved by paying NHS staff more to work overtime, boosting availability across evenings and weekends.

These policies formed the basis of Sir Keir’s second key pledge to “cut NHS waiting times with 40,000 more appointments each week, during evenings and weekends.”

In a shake-up of primary care, the party would trial “neighbourhood health centres”, bringing together a wide range of services – including doctors, nurses, care workers and mental health specialists – to cater for millions of patients currently clogging up overloaded A&E units. It would also use spare capacity in the independent sector to speed up treatment.

It has also vowed to “bring back the family doctor” – with GPs paid more for ensuring patients can see the clinician of their choice. Labour has said it would use the NHS App to “end the 8am scramble” for GP appointments and allow patients to book directly for routine checks, while boosting self-referrals and cutting red tape in pharmacies.

It would provide an extra 700,000 urgent dentist appointments each year and introduce supervised tooth brushing in schools for three to five-year-olds, while offering “golden hellos” of £20,000 to newly-qualified dentists who agree to work in areas struggling to recruit.

To tackle the mental health crisis, the party has said it would introduce specialist support in every school and provide an open-access hub for young people in every community.

It would also conduct an assessment of all NHS capital projects to identify any inefficiencies before committing any more money to fixing the “crumbling” estate.

Labour has pledged to double the number of medical school spaces to 15,000, a target also proposed by the NHS and endorsed by the Government, and provide 10,000 extra nursing and midwifery placements.

It would also train an additional 700 district nurses and 5,000 health visitors each year, and recruit 8,500 more mental health professionals.

To boost retention, the party would “consider the case for looking more broadly at how public sector pay is set”. It would also introduce a “targeted scheme” to incentivise senior doctors to stay in work.

Labour has pledged to double the number of state-of-the-art CT and MRI scanners and streamline recruitment for clinical trials.
‘Prevention first’ approach

As part of a “prevention first” approach, it would ban the promotion of junk food to young people and back the Tories’ incremental ban on smoking.

The party would establish fully-funded breakfast clubs in every primary school in England and implement a compulsory “balanced and broad national curriculum with a wide range of physical activities”.

It would also introduce stricter legal targets on air pollution and oversee the retrofitting of millions of homes to help keep them warm and free of damp, while guaranteeing the right to sick pay from day one to minimise the spread of illness in the workplace.

At the same time, Labour would work towards a locally-delivered “National Care Service”.

To tackle staff shortages in social care, it would introduce a “fair pay agreement collectively negotiated across the sector”.

And to raise standards, it would require all providers to demonstrate financial sustainability and responsible tax practices, to value their staff, and to deliver high quality care before they are allowed to receive contracts from local authorities or gain registration from the Care Quality Commission.

It would also give people in care homes a new legal right to see their loved ones and support unpaid carers by offering them paid family carer’s leave.

Labour originally said that much of the health plan would be paid for by abolishing the non-dom tax status but the strategy was thrown into disarray when Jeremy Hunt, the Chancellor, announced the same move at the Spring Budget.

The party has since said it will pay for NHS improvements by going further than the Tories and closing an inheritance tax loophole for non-doms while cracking down on tax avoidance.
Tax

Close inheritance tax loophole for non-doms


Crack down on tax-avoiders


Impose VAT on private school fees


No rise in corporation tax


Overhaul business rates and review tax reliefs

Sir Keir’s first key pledge included a vow to keep taxes “as low as possible”, without committing to specific cuts.

This was broadly in line with Labour’s tax policy to date, which has been vague. However the party has been explicit about a few things.

It had promised to scrap the “non-domiciled” regime, which allows people living in Britain to avoid paying UK tax on money they make overseas for up to 15 years – but this policy has been snatched by the Tories, leaving a hole in Labour’s finances.

The party has since pledged to go further by closing the inheritance tax loophole for non-doms and target tax-avoiders to pay for its spending commitments on schools and the NHS.

Elsewhere, the party would implement 20 per cent VAT on private school fees, with the proceeds funnelled into state education.

Ms Reeves has also promised not to raise corporation tax for the duration of the next Parliament and said she would overhaul the business rates system and review all tax reliefs.

Sir Keir has made clear that he would like to reduce the tax burden on “working people”, while Ms Reeves has hinted at cuts for high earners, vowing to ensure “success is celebrated” under a Labour government.

She has attacked the Tories over their decision to freeze income tax thresholds in the face of rising inflation, but not committed to changing this, insisting it would be “irresponsible” to pledge tax cuts without pinpointing how they would be funded.

Ms Reeves has said she has “no plans” for a wealth tax but the party has explored closing a loophole for second homeowners.
The economy

Bid for highest sustained growth in G7


Tough new fiscal rules and enhanced role for the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR)


New Office for Value for Money


Invest heavily in green projects


New deal for working people

Sir Keir’s first pledge to keep taxes low was contingent on a promise to “deliver economic stability with tough spending rules, so we can grow our economy”.

This drew on existing policies, with Labour having already set an aim to secure the highest sustained growth in the G7. To do this, it would adopt a new approach it has coined “securonomics”, or “modern supply side economics”.

This would involve bringing in “tough” fiscal rules with a new “enhanced role” for the OBR and establishing a new Office for Value for Money to ensure taxpayer cash is being well spent.

The party originally pledged to invest £28 billion in the drive towards a low-carbon economy every year until 2030 but has since dramatically scaled down the spending plan following sustained criticism from the Conservatives.

The proposals include an £8 billion national wealth fund, which would aim to “unlock billions of pounds of private investment” to support the energy transition.

The party would also reform the planning system to fast-track “priority growth” projects, such as battery factories, labs and 5G infrastructure.

And Labour has vowed to deliver a “new deal for working people”, featuring a “genuine living wage”, a “right to switch off”, a ban on zero hours contracts, and an end to fire and rehire.
Environment, energy and net zero

Clean power by 2030


New publicly-owned energy company


End de-facto ban on onshore wind


Expand windfall tax on oil and gas producers


Upgrade five million homes in five years


Extra £23.7 billion spent on green projects over first term

Labour initially vowed to borrow £28 billion per year from day one to invest in its flagship green prosperity plan.

But this pledge has been significantly watered down over time. Ms Reeves first admitted that the annual sum would not be hit until at least the second half of Labour’s first term.

Then Sir Keir cast further doubt on the scale of the investment, saying it would be subject to the party’s fiscal rules. In a major U-turn, he downgraded the spending commitment to just £4.7 billion a year after admitting it was unaffordable.

Under the new, slimmed down blueprint, public funding for a major home insulation drive was reduced by nearly 80 per cent, from a planned £6 billion a year to just £1.3 billion.

As a result, Labour says only five million houses would benefit from the scheme over the course of five years, compared to the original plan of 19 million across a decade. This is the only project the party has said would be scaled down as a result of the change.

The overarching aim is to turn the UK into a “clean energy superpower”, with a zero-carbon electricity system by 2030. To help achieve this, Labour would set up Great British Energy, a publicly owned body that would invest in green projects like wind farms, with a budget of £1.7 billion a year.

This formed the basis of Sir Keir’s fourth pledge, to “set up Great British Energy, a publicly-owned clean power company, to cut bills for good and boost energy security.”

The new national wealth fund would also put money into gigafactories, clean steel plants, “renewable-ready” ports, green hydrogen and energy storage, with funding of £1.5 billion a year.

The green plan, which now amounts to £23.7 billion over five years, would be on top of £50 billion already committed by the Tories, which Labour has promised to match.

It would be partially funded by expanding the windfall tax on oil and gas producers, which was introduced by Rishi Sunak when he was chancellor to help pay for energy bills support.

Meanwhile, Labour has pledged to overturn the de-facto ban on onshore wind in England, set councils binding targets for how quickly they approve green energy projects, and establish a “British jobs bonus” to incentivise firms to build their supply chains in the UK.

Before it announced the U-turn on the £28 billion fund, the party had claimed the green reforms would take £1,400 off annual household bills and £53 billion off energy bills for businesses by 2030, while creating over a million jobs in 10 years.
Education and childcare

Overhaul childcare system


Delivery of ‘more effective’ Ofsted system


Recruit 6,500 more teachers


Review school curriculum and assessment


New register for children in home education


Reform student loan repayments

Sir Keir’s sixth pledge is focused on education, with the Labour leader vowing to “recruit 6,500 new teachers in key subjects to prepare children for life, work and the future, paid for by ending tax breaks for private schools”.

Labour’s plan for schools also includes scrapping single-word Ofsted judgments and replacing them with “report cards”, and commissioning an expert-led review of curriculum and assessment with an emphasis on “life skills”.

Meanwhile, the party has said it would give the regulator new powers to monitor pupil absence rates and legislate for a new register of children in home education. Elsewhere, it has pledged to overhaul Britain’s childcare system and rethink vocational education.

The aim is to ensure half a million more children hit the early learning goals by 2030, deliver a “sustained rise” in school outcomes over the next decade, and expand “high-quality” training routes.

Labour has yet to confirm its plans for childcare, having commissioned a review by Sir David Bell, the former Ofsted chief inspector, into delivering a more effective system.

It has said it wants to build capacity in the sector but has not specified how it would do this beyond removing “legislative barriers to local authorities opening new childcare provision” and supporting the workforce through high-quality training.

Bridget Phillipson, the shadow education secretary, has previously said she wants to move away from the current free hours model, and twice failed to rule out bringing in changes to means-testing.

But Labour has since welcomed Rishi Sunak’s decision to extend free hours to younger children, suggesting it could keep the existing system in place, at least to start with.

The party has said it will not take away new entitlements granted by the Tories, which include 15 hours of free care per week for two-year-olds.

To support older students, Labour would train more than 1,000 new careers advisers and deliver two weeks of work experience for every young person at secondary school or college.

It would also reform the student loan repayment system to make it “fairer”, with scope for a “month-on-month tax cut” for graduates.
Defence

Boost defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP


Commit to Nato and nuclear deterrent


Review defence and security to assess need


Create new armed forces commissioner

If it wins power, Labour would aim to raise defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP, matching the Government’s existing target. But Sir Keir has said he will only spend the extra money if it is achievable within the party’s borrowing rules.

Labour has also said it would make an “unshakeable commitment” to Nato and Britain’s nuclear deterrent, in a clear departure from the Corbyn years.

It has pledged a new “triple lock” commitment to build at least four new nuclear submarines at Barrow, keep the continuous at-sea deterrent and fund any future upgrades needed to the fleet.

The party would conduct a review of “strategic defence and security” in its first year to “fully understand the state of our Armed Forces, the nature of threats we face and the capabilities needed”.

And it would legislate to establish an Armed Forces commissioner as a “strong independent voice to improve service life”, while ensuring military homes are fit for purpose.

John Healey, the shadow defence secretary, has also said Labour would shift procurement onto an “urgent operational footing” to support Ukraine and replenish British stocks for any future conflicts.
Pensions

Bring back lifetime cap on pension savings


Commitment to the triple lock


Pensions review to ensure best value for savers


New powers for regulator to tackle under-performing schemes

Labour has said it would bring back the lifetime cap on pension savings abolished by Mr Hunt.

Like the Tories, it has committed to retaining the triple lock, which raises the state pension every year in line with whichever is highest out of wage growth, inflation or 2.5 per cent.

It has also pledged to conduct a review of the pensions system to ensure best value for savers, while giving new powers to the regulator to consolidate schemes where they are under-performing.
Policing and crime

Halve serious violent crime in 10 years


Extra 13,000 bobbies on the beat


Reintroduce strengthened anti-social behaviour orders (Asbos)


Scrap £200 rule on shoplifting


New bravery medal for police killed in line of duty

For his fifth pledge, Sir Keir vowed to “crack down on anti-social behaviour, with more neighbourhood police paid for by ending wasteful contracts, tough new penalties for offenders, and a new network of youth hubs.”

The party has promised to halve serious violent crime and raise confidence in the police and criminal justice system to its highest levels, all within a decade.

Specifically, it wants to halve the level of violence against women and girls and incidents of knife crime.

To protect women and girls, the party would put rape units into every police force and domestic abuse experts in 999 control rooms, as well as specialists in the court system. It would also introduce a new domestic abuse register.

To tackle knife crime, it would put youth workers into A&E departments and custody suites and set up 90 new youth hubs to give teenagers the “best start in life”.

And to raise confidence in the police, Labour has pledged to recruit an extra 13,000 neighbourhood and community support officers. It would also introduce compulsory anti-racism training and a new standards regime.

Meanwhile, the party would reintroduce tougher Asbos with powers to make arrests and force fly-tippers to clean up their mess.

It would also scrap the current £200 threshold to ensure all shoplifting crimes, no matter how small, have to be investigated by police.

And it would introduce a new bravery medal for officers who are killed in the line of duty.

To ensure more criminals are brought to justice, Labour would boost the number of crown prosecutors and force the police to recruit detectives directly from industry.
Migration

Treat people smugglers like terrorists


New cross-border police unit


Extra 1,000 caseworkers to cut asylum backlog


Possible returns deal with EU


Repeal Rwanda Bill

Sir Keir’s third pledge is to “launch a new Border Security Command with hundreds of new specialist investigators, and use counter-terror powers to smash the criminal boat gangs.”

It draws on Labour’s plan to address the small boats crisis, which has two main planks: cracking down on the “vile” people-smuggling gangs, and reducing the asylum backlog.

Sir Keir has also indicated that he would be prepared to do a deal with the EU that would involve taking a quota of migrants who arrive in the bloc in exchange for the ability to return those who illegally cross the Channel to England.

The Labour leader has said he would treat people smugglers like terrorists by giving the National Crime Agency expanded powers to freeze their assets and place restrictions on their movement. He would also work more closely with Europe, creating a new cross-border police unit to “tackle gangs upstream”.

Meanwhile, Labour would recruit more than 1,000 caseworkers to cut the asylum backlog, fast-track decisions on applications from “safe” countries, namely Albania and India, and create a new returns unit, again backed by 1,000 staff, to speed up removals.

The party has vehemently opposed the Rwanda deportation scheme and vowed to repeal it.

But Sir Keir has indicated he would be willing to consider other options to divert migrants abroad. In December, he said he would look at offshore processing, used by countries such as Australia, in a significant hardening of his stance on border controls.
Housing

Build 1.5 million homes


Utilise “poor quality” green belt land


Set home ownership target of 70 per cent


New mortgage guarantee scheme

Labour has pledged to build 1.5 million new homes within its first five years in power, underpinned by a “blitz of planning reform”.

The central policy is to rip up “restrictive” laws to allow construction on “poor quality” green belt land. Dubbed the “grey belt”, this would include areas such as “disused car parks” and “dreary wasteland”.

Labour would also build “the next generation of new towns” across the country, devolve power to local mayors to kick-start development, and give young buyers “first dibs” on new properties in their areas.

Sir Keir has set a home ownership target of 70 per cent and promised to get more people on the housing ladder with a new mortgage guarantee scheme.

The party has also pledged to deliver the biggest boost to affordable housing “in a generation” by strengthening existing rules to prevent developers “wriggling out of their responsibilities”.



Up next

Voters back taxing rich more to help pay for NHS, poll finds – as report shows Sunak wealthier than the King

Andy Gregory
Fri, 17 May 2024 

Nearly two thirds of voters would be more likely to back a political party committed to higher taxes on the wealthiest to fund the NHS and public services.

The data on public opinion on taxes comes as the annual Sunday Times Rich List found Britain’s 350 richest families hold a combined wealth of £795bn – with the fortune of prime minister Rishi Sunak rising.

Both major political parties clicked into general election campaign mode this week, with Sir Keir Starmer unveiling a Tony Blair-style set of election pledges and chancellor Jeremy Hunt using a speech on Friday to warn that taxes would rise under a Labour government.

But a new FocalData survey commissioned by the group Tax Justice UK suggests that there is public support for major changes to the tax system.

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt used a speech on Friday to claim that tax would rise under a Labour government (Aaron Chown/PA)

Told that a 1 to 2 per cent ‘mansion tax’ on assets worth over £10m would affect around 20,000 people and could raise up to £22bn a year, 72 per cent of respondents indicated that they would support for such a tax, with 73 per cent backing such a toll to help invest in the NHS.

And 57 per cent of the survey’s 1,011 respondents said they would support charging the same tax rate on income derived from wealth as on income earned from employment.

The findings come as the publication of the Sunday Times Rich List suggested that prime minister Rishi Sunak is now wealthier than King Charles.

The personal fortune of the prime minister and his wife, Akshata Murty, surged by more than £120m over the past year, soaring to £651m in the latest list – as the latter’s shares in her father’s IT firm Infosys grew in value by £108.8m.

This put the Sunak’s wealth above that of the King, whose fortune rose by £10m to hit £610m.

Rishi Sunak’s wealth is greater than that of King Charles (Getty Images)









Responding to the new Rich List, Downing Street insisted Mr Sunak should be judged on his actions and not his personal fortune.

The prime minister’s deputy spokesperson told reporters: “He’s been asked about this before and we’d always point people to the actions that he takes to support people ... That’s his focus and his priority and he should be judged on that.”

The 350 wealthiest individuals and families on the list together held combined wealth of £795.36 billion, according to the new data – which showed the number of British billionaires tumbled slightly from a peak of 177 in 2022 to 165 this year.

Robert Watts, who compiled the rich list, said the findings suggested that “Britain’s billionaire boom has come to an end”, adding: “Many of our home-grown entrepreneurs have seen their fortunes fall and some of the global super rich who came here are moving away.

“Thousands of British livelihoods rely on the super-rich to some extent. We’ll have to wait and see whether we have now reached peak billionaire, and what that means for our economy.”

Responding to the findings indicating support for taxing such individuals more stringently, Tax Justice UK’s head of advocacy and policy Rachael Henry said: “Taxing the wealth of the very richest is an extremely popular policy – a vote winner – and an incredibly sensible way to help fix the country.

“People in Britain are really struggling and so are public services. The NHS is wounded, getting an NHS dentist is akin to a lottery win, and GP surgeries are creaking under pressure. Politicians need to see the wood for the trees and use the tools available to them to inject life back into the country.”














Rishi Sunak and Akshata Murty rise up rich list as fortune increases by £120m

Matthew Weaver
THE GUARDIAN
Fri, 17 May 2024

Rishi Sunak and his wife, Akshata Murty. The couple’s wealth was estimated at £651m, up from £529m in 2023.Photograph: Oli Scarff/AFP/Getty Images


The personal fortune of Rishi Sunak and his wife, Akshata Murty, has increased by £120m in the run-up to the next general election, figures reveal.

The latest annual Sunday Times rich list shows the couple’s fortune grew substantially at a time when millions of Britons struggled with the cost of living. Sunak and Murty’s wealth is estimated at £651m in the latest list, up from £529m in 2023.

The figures will reinforce public perceptions of Sunak’s wealth. In previous surveys, the public have overwhelmingly used the word “rich” to describe the prime minister.


Last year’s rise in the couple’s fortune was linked to Murty’s stake in Infosys, the $70bn (£55.3bn) Indian IT firm co-founded by her billionaire father. Her shares grew in value by £108.8m to nearly £590m for the year.

The couple’s wealth remains below its level in 2022, when it was estimated at about £730m.

On Thursday Sunak, whose government is trailing in in the polls behind Labour, insisted he would remain an MP if the Conservatives lose the next election. Speaking on ITV’s Loose Women, he said: “Yes of course I’m staying, I love being an MP, I love my constituents, I love my home in North Yorkshire, it’s wonderful – and I love being able to get back there.”

His family own an apartment in Santa Monica, California. Sunak spent much of his 20s and early 30s on the US west coast and met Murty at Stanford business school. Sunak’s interest in technology and AI has led to suggestions he could get a job in Silicon Valley.

The rich list shows that King Charles’s wealth also grew in the year, from £600m to £610m.

The list records that the number of British billionaires tumbled again, continuing a theme seen in 2023. The number of billionaires reached a peak of 177 in 2022 before dropping to 171 last year and falling again to 165 this year, driven by the private wealth of some contracting amid high borrowing rates, and others leaving the country.

Related: British asylum housing tycoon breaks into Sunday Times rich list

Robert Watts, the compiler of the list, said: “This year’s Sunday Times rich list suggests Britain’s billionaire boom has come to an end. Many of our homegrown entrepreneurs have seen their fortunes fall and some of the global super-rich who came here are moving away.

“Thousands of British livelihoods rely on the super-rich to some extent. We’ll have to wait and see whether we have now reached peak billionaire, and what that means for our economy.”

The list of Britain’s 350 wealthiest individuals and families together hold combined wealth of £795.36bn, according to the data. This year’s list is once again topped by Gopi Hinduja and his family, who control the Indian conglomerate Hinduja Group. Hinduja and his family’s wealth rose to £37.2bn, from £35bn.

Meanwhile, the fortunes of a number of the UK’s highest-profile billionaires shrank over the year amid challenging periods for many businesses and investments. Jim Ratcliffe, James Dyson and Richard Branson also recorded declines for the year.

Ratcliffe, the Manchester United investor and Ineos founder, was the biggest faller on the list, with his net worth dropping by more than £6bn to £23.52bn.

Dyson was the second largest faller, dropping from £23bn to £20.8bn. Meanwhile, Branson’s wealth fell from £4.2bn to £2.4bn after a challenging year for Virgin Galactic.


Rishi Just Got Even Richer: Sunak And His Wife Climb Up List Of UK's Wealthiest People

Kate Nicholson
HUFFOOST
Fri, 17 May 2024 

Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murthy are now in 245th place on The Sunday Times Rich List. via Associated Press

Rishi Sunak and Akshata Murty have raked in the money over the last year and are now in the top 250 wealthiest people in the UK.

The prime minister and his wife were already the richest people to ever live in No.10 Downing Street – and are just getting even richer.

They have climbed up The Sunday Times’ Rich List in the last year moving from 275th place to to 245th, as their net worth soared from £529m in 2023 to £651m.

For context, that means they are wealthier than King Charles, whose own fortunes crept up from £600m to a not inconsiderable £610m this year.

Most of their wealth comes from Murty’s shareholding in Infosys, an IT company co-founded by her father and based in Bangalore, India.

Shares have ballooned in value over the last 12 months, increasing by £108.8m to nearly £590m.

Murty received £13m in dividends over the last year from Infosys and is expected to receive another £10.5m this year.

This source of income was a source of great controversy at one point as it was revealed Murty had “non-dom” tax status.

That meant she claimed her permanent home was outside the UK and therefore she only had to pay tax on earnings made here – not on the Bangalore-based Infosys dividends.

She was able to avoid paying £20.6m in tax because of this status.

To make matters worse for the couple, her husband was the chancellor when this information made it to the media.

Murty later agreed to pay UK tax on her overseas income from 2021.

Murty is still the breadwinner in their household by a long shot – although it’s worth remembering the prime minister is a former hedge fund manager.

Sunak’s MP (£91,346) salary and PM salary (£80,807) account for just 6.5% of his personal income, with his hefty investment portfolio returns making up the rest.

He made £2.2m in 2022/23, more than 60 times the average British salary, according to the Rich List. It’s not known how much he made per year before entering parliament in 2015.

But, this is not the wealthiest Sunak and Murty have ever been.

Prior to Sunak’s election as Tory leader and PM in late 2022, the pair were worth an estimated £730m.

Still, this year’s increase is unlikely to do Sunak any favours in the public eye.

The news comes at a time when the Conservatives are dragging in the polls and the public already associate the prime minister solely with being “rich”.

Sunak claims that he does not mind being asked about his money, and said last year that “very few people bring it up with me”.




Loose Women's Judi Love demolishes Rishi Sunak in grilling over poverty as his wealth rises to £651m

Jake Holden
Fri, 17 May 2024

Rishi Sunak said he was 'intimidated' coming on the Loose Women panel show on ITV -
Credit:ITV


Rishi Sunak underwent a severe grilling on Loose Women on Thursday (May 17) as one of the panellists pressed him on poverty at a time when his own wealth has skyrocketed. Judi Love did not hold back in asking him about poverty in the UK and when his government would help out those who were suffering.

The toasting on the all-female panel show created waves online, with Rishi himself saying he was 'intimidated' coming on the show, as social media showed its appreciation. Judi Love asked about what Mr Sunak's government will be doing for people in social housing and when.

She said: "I was in social housing, I lived in a home that had damp that was affecting my child's health. We've got NHS workers right now as we're having this interview, queuing to go to food banks."

READ MORE: Daniel Anjorin laid to rest in East London with over 100 people paying tribute to 'gentle-spirited' teen

She added: "People are suffering right now, what are you going to do and when are you going to do it?" to which there was a round of applause. In response, Mr Sunak spoke about online safety saying that the regulator Ofcom is setting out exactly what is permissible to post online with the threat of 'enormous fines' to those who don't comply - seemingly avoiding Judi's point about social housing.

Judi Love said she had lived in social housing with damp affecting her child's health and asked Mr Sunak what he would do for people still living like that -Credit:Kate Green/BAFTA/Getty Images for BAFTA

Judi brings him back on topic quickly, enquiring about people who might not have internet access as they can't afford to pay the bills. Judi says these people are "looking to you [Sunak] for a save line. We've got people going to work who are not eating because we're in a state of poverty. What is going to take place now? What are you going to do now to address this?"

Mr Sunak, whose own personal wealth combined with his wife's this week was reported to have risen to £651m, then began to look into the past rather than the present and spoke about financial security during the pandemic with furlough and struggles with the war in Ukraine. "None of this has been easy for anybody, Judi. What we've done during that time is continually provide support. You saw that with me during the pandemic and furlough - there were millions of people who thought they were going to lose their jobs and we stepped in to provide support - we did the same with energy bills."

Kaye Adams interjected: "But there are four million children living in poverty, Prime Minister", but she was ignored by Mr Sunak. Instead, he said that the welfare system was being upgraded and that for those in work, he claimed there had been a tax cut - though for many this is not actually the case in real terms as income tax brackets remained static in the face of inflation.

Judi brought up the point that as the UK's richest-ever Prime Minister, he might be out of touch with the needs of people living in poverty. She said: "A lot of people are concerned that you [Sunak] cannot emotionally connect with them because you haven't and don't live the life they've lived.


"But there are four million children living in poverty, Prime Minister," Kaye Adams said to Rishi Sunak -Credit:Mike Marsland/WireImage/Getty Images

"How can you connect to people when they're saying to you that they're worried to send their child to the local shop because of knife crime? When they're worried to sleep in their home because of damp? When they're worried to take the day off sick even though they're suffering from mental health because they don't want to miss that pay cheque?"

Again Mr Sunak pointed back to the pandemic furlough saying: "I think I'd ask people to judge me by my actions and whenever the country's been in these moments, that's what I've done and that's how I was raised."

"How were you raised?" Judi asked defiantly, cutting him off.


'Why Do You Hate Pensioners?': Rishi Sunak Suffers Brutal Loose Women Grilling

Ned Simons
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Rishi Sunak ITV

Rishi Sunak was left flailing as he as subjected to a brutal interview on ITV’s Loose Women.

The prime minister was tackled over child poverty and asked “why do you hate pensioners”.

Sunak was also told many voters did not believe he was able to “emotionally connect” with ordinary people.

At the start of the 15-minute grilling, Sunak indicated he was expecting a rough ride.

“I have done a lot of things in this job but being here is probably on the more intimidating end,” he said.

Presenter Janet Street-Porter told him: “You were quite smiley earlier, weren’t you? Will you be smiling in five minutes.”

Street-Porter was then loudly applauded by the audience as the took Sunak to task over pensioner poverty.

“I think you’re a decent man. I do think you work hard. Hats off to you for that. I think your heart is in the right place. But why do you hate pensioners?” she said.

As the audience applauded, Street-Porter added: “That’s the only conclusion I can come to as a result of the spring Budget. So you lowered the National Insurance by 4 pence - big deal, pensioners don’t pay it.

“Then you froze the tax thresholds. So yes you gave us more pension, but that leaves a gap of only £1,000 if you get the basic, average pension, to the threshold of paying tax.

“There’s an argument that pensioners have come out worse under your supervision.”

The prime minister said he did “care deeply about pensioners” and that people who “work hard” all their life “should have the dignity and respect in retirement”.

Sunak said his decision to maintain the triple-lock on pensions had led to a £900 boost to the state pension.

The triple-lock policy means the state pension rises every April every year in line with whichever is highest out of inflation, average wage growth or 2.5%.



Judi Love, another of the interviewers, also demanded to know what the government was going to do “now” to help the country.

“People are suffering right now,” she said. “What is happening now is we are losing kids to poverty in the UK.”

Figures show that the number of children in relative poverty - after housing costs are taken into account - now stands at 4.3 million.

Love also questioned whether the PM, who is a multi-millionaire, could understand the lives of normal people.

“A lot of people are concerned you cannot emotionally connect with them because you haven’t and don’t live the life they have lived,” she said.

The Conservatives are on course to lose the upcoming general election, but Sunk told Loose Women he would not quit parliament if that happened. “Of course I’m staying, I love being an MP,” he said.
Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought – report

CLIMATE CRISIS IS CAPITALI$T CRISIS

Oliver Milman
Fri, 17 May 2024 
THE GUARDIAN

Wildfires near Pournari, in Magoula, 25km south-west of Athens, Greece, on 18 July 2023.
Photograph: Spyros Bakalis/AFP/Getty Images


The economic damage wrought by climate change is six times worse than previously thought, with global heating set to shrink wealth at a rate consistent with the level of financial losses of a continuing permanent war, research has found.

A 1C increase in global temperature leads to a 12% decline in world gross domestic product (GDP), the researchers found, a far higher estimate than that of previous analyses. The world has already warmed by more than 1C (1.8F) since pre-industrial times and many climate scientists predict a 3C (5.4F) rise will occur by the end of this century due to the ongoing burning of fossil fuels, a scenario that the new working paper, yet to be peer-reviewed, states will come with an enormous economic cost.

A 3C temperature increase will cause “precipitous declines in output, capital and consumption that exceed 50% by 2100” the paper states. This economic loss is so severe that it is “comparable to the economic damage caused by fighting a war domestically and permanently”, it adds.

“There will still be some economic growth happening but by the end of the century people may well be 50% poorer than they would’ve been if it wasn’t for climate change,” said Adrien Bilal, an economist at Harvard who wrote the paper with Diego Känzig, an economist at Northwestern University.

“I think everyone could imagine what they would do with an income that is twice as large as it is now. It would change people’s lives.”

Bilal said that purchasing power, which is how much people are able to buy with their money, would already be 37% higher than it is now without global heating seen over the past 50 years. This lost wealth will spiral if the climate crisis deepens, comparable to the sort of economic drain often seen during wartime.

“Let’s be clear that the comparison to war is only in terms of consumption and GDP – all the suffering and death of war is the important thing and isn’t included in this analysis,” Bilal said. “The comparison may seem shocking, but in terms of pure GDP there is an analogy there. It’s a worrying thought.”

The paper places a much higher estimate on economic losses than previous research, calculating a social cost of carbon, which is the cost in dollars of damage done per each additional ton of carbon emissions, to be $1,056 per ton. This compares to a range set out by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that estimates the cost to be around $190 per ton.

Bilal said the new research takes a more “holistic” look at the economic cost of climate change by analyzing it on a global scale, rather than on an individual country basis. This approach, he said, captured the interconnected nature of the impact of heatwaves, storms, floods and other worsening climate impacts that damage crop yields, reduce worker productivity and reduce capital investment.

“They have taken a step back and linking local impacts with global temperatures,” said Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia University who wasn’t involved in the work and said it was significant. “If the results hold up, and I have no reason to believe they wouldn’t, they will make a massive difference in the overall climate damage estimates.”

The paper found that the economic impact of the climate crisis will be surprisingly uniform around the world, albeit with lower-income countries starting at a lower point in wealth. This should spur wealthy countries such as the US, the paper points out, to take action on reducing planet-heating emissions in its own economic interest.

Even with steep emissions cuts, however, climate change will bear a heavy economic cost, the paper finds. Even if global heating was restrained to little more than 1.5C (2.7F) by the end of the century, a globally agreed-upon goal that now appears to have slipped from reach, the GDP losses are still around 15%.

“That is still substantial,” said Bilal. “The economy may keep growing but less than it would because of climate change. It will be a slow-moving phenomenon, although the impacts will be felt acutely when they hit.”

The paper follows separate research released last month that found average incomes will fall by almost a fifth within the next 26 years compared to what they would’ve been without the climate crisis. Rising temperatures, heavier rainfall and more frequent and intense extreme weather are projected to cause $38tn of destruction each year by mid-century, according to the research.

Both papers make clear that the cost of transitioning away from fossil fuels and curbing the impacts of climate change, while not trivial, pale in comparison to the cost of climate change itself. “Unmitigated climate change is a lot more costly than not doing anything about it, that is clear,” said Wagner.

‘Dozens killed or injured in Israeli strikes’ on known Gaza aid locations

Bel Trew
Thu, 16 May 2024 

A destroyed World Central Kitchen vehicle in Gaza (AP)

Israeli forces have killed and injured dozens of humanitarian aid workers, including British citizens, in eight strikes on aid convoys and shelters whose coordinates were shared with Israel to ensure their protection, according to research by The Independent and a new investigation by Human Rights Watch (HRW).

Israel’s forces did not issue warnings before the strikes, which killed or injured at least 31 people including several children, HRW’s report alleges. The New York-based rights group identified eight different incidents in total, including the 1 April drone strike on a World Central Kitchen (WCK) convoy, which killed seven aid workers. It concluded that the eight strikes – which killed at least 15 people, including two children – were likely to have been unlawfully indiscriminate, or to have been carried out without sufficient precautions being taken to ensure that the target was military. The hits also had a massive impact on the distribution and coordination of aid – at a time when Gaza faces famine.

The report corroborated testimonies gathered by The Independent, which show that in several instances British doctors and aid workers were present and even killed or wounded by the strikes. The strikes have included naval shelling and drone strikes. At least one of them took place in a so-called humanitarian zone, al-Mawasi.


The Israeli military did not comment about the details of these specific incidents but said any incident involving humanitarian aid convoys, facilities or personnel “is being thoroughly examined” included those The Independent was investigating and those mentioned in the HRW report.

“According to the examination’s findings, lessons are learned and implemented in order to prevent reoccurrence of such incidents and if so required, command, disciplinary and other measures are taken against individuals responsible,” the military added.

It said: “The IDF has continuously worked throughout the war to allow and facilitate the entry and delivery of extensive humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, out of its commitment to international humanitarian law, and going even beyond. This is done partly by working in tight cooperation with aid agencies and organizations and with the international community” via a joint coordination cell.

However, heads of aid agencies and UN officials told The Independent that a coordination system that is supposed to protect aid workers is “clearly failing” and that there needs to be dramatic change.

HRW said that the “pattern of attacks despite proper notification of Israeli authorities” raises serious questions about Israel’s commitment to, and its capacity for, compliance with international humanitarian law. It concluded that Israel’s allies, such as the US and the UK – whose weapons were apparently used in the attacks the organisation documented – should suspend military assurances and arms sales to Israel.

“Israel’s killing of seven World Central Kitchen aid workers was shocking and should never have happened under international law,” said Belkis Wille, associate director of the Crisis, Conflict and Arms division at HRW. “Israel’s allies need to recognise that these attacks that have killed aid workers have happened over and over again, and they need to stop.”

Palestinians inspect a vehicle used by World Central Kitchen that was damaged in an airstrike in Deir al-Balah in April (AP)

Jan Egeland, the head of the Norwegian Refugee Council, told The Independent that, in total, more than 250 aid workers have been killed since October, “which we have never seen before”. He added: “It’s a world record ... Gaza is the most dangerous place for human for aid workers in recent memory.”

Tess Ingram, from the United Nations child agency Unicef, who was herself part of a UN convoy carrying aid to northern Gaza that was coordinated with the military but came under fire, said the system of deconfliction is “clearly failing”.

“What happened to WCK was tragic, but it’s not an isolated incident. We need to know that when we get a safety assurance for a mission, it will be facilitated, that it will be safe, and that we can trust those safety assurances. At the moment, it’s clear that the coordination system is not being respected.”

Israel launched its heaviest ever bombardment of Gaza, plus a ground assault and a blockade, in retaliation for a bloody attack by Hamas on 7 October during which around 1,200 people were killed and another 250 were taken hostage, including toddlers.

Since then, Palestinian health workers in the Hamas-run territory say Israel’s bombardment has killed at least 35,000 Palestinians, the majority of whom were women and children. Among the dead are more than 220 aid workers, including 190 UN personnel.

Most recently, this week saw the the first death of a foreign UN security staff member, who was killed on Monday (13 May) when a UN-marked vehicle travelling to the European hospital in Rafah was struck, a spokesperson said. Separately, the UN’s Palestinian refugee agency, UNRWA, reported that another of its staff members, a 53-year-old senior projects officer, was killed on Sunday after leaving Rafah, in an Israeli strike on the central town of Deir al-Balah.

Displaced Palestinians arrive in Deir al-Balah in central Gaza after fleeing from the southern city of Rafah (AP)

UNRWA officials told The Independent that they had registered 349 incidents affecting their premises and the internationally displaced people (IDPs) sheltering in and around them. They said these incidents had resulted in the killing of at least 408 IDPs (including at least 15 children and seven UNRWA staff). They said strikes from both sides had affected 30 UNRWA health centres, seven warehouses, six aid distribution centres, and 261 of their schools.

While facts surrounding many incidents remain subject to verification, UNRWA said the information so far available indicates that the “vast majority of incidents” were due to attacks and actions undertaken by Israeli forces.

These attacks are having a chilling effect on efforts to provide lifesaving aid in Gaza.

HRW said it has identified eight attacks that took place between 18 November and 1 April. These include an attack on a Medecins Sans Frontieres (MSF) convoy along with a guest house and a shelter; attacks on two UNRWA convoys and an associated guest house; an attack on a shelter belonging to the International Rescue Committee and Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP); and an attack on a home sheltering an employee of the aid group ANERA.

The Independent has separately interviewed staff and witnesses, who corroborated the findings in the HRW report.

On 18 January 18, Aseel Baidoun of MAP told The Independent that the Israeli military had hit a residential compound housing the charity’s emergency medical team (EMT) and members of MAP’s local team and their family members in al-Mawasi – the alleged “safe zone” – despite the compound’s coordinates having been submitted to the deconfliction process. MAP said British government personnel had also confirmed on 22 December that the compound was registered as a “sensitive site”. Since then, an independent assessment by the UN has concluded that the damage was the result of an airstrike, most likely involving a weapon only owned by the Israeli military.

Tent encampments housing displaced Palestinians in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip, by the border fence with Egypt (AFP via Getty)

The attack injured several team members, caused significant damage to the building, and required the withdrawal of the six international members from Gaza, forcing the organisation to suspend lifesaving medical work at Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis.

Ms Baidoun said that since the attack, Israel had provided six different explanations as to why the airstrike took place, including that the Israeli military was unaware of what had happened; denying involvement; accepting responsibility for the strike but asserting that it was a mistake caused by a defective tail fin on the missile that was fired; and blaming the hit on a piece of aircraft fuselage.

“The variety of responses highlights a continued lack of transparency regarding what occurred,” she said. “It is clear from this experience that the Israeli military and government are either unable or unwilling to properly investigate this serious incident.”

She said the UK and the US, as current suppliers of arms and munitions to Israel, “have a particular responsibility to hold Israel accountable for this and other attacks on aid workers and civilians”.

UNRWA officials told The Independent that three of their aid convoys had been hit by Israeli fire – including in a 5 February incident in which naval gunfire punched a hole in a UNRWA aid truck that was flanked by marked UN vehicles. The vehicles were waiting at a previously agreed holding point for permission to proceed north.

“The three incidents involved UNRWA personnel on the way in or out of the north of Gaza. Twice was Israeli gunfire; the third incident in February was [carried out] by the Israeli navy,” said Juliette Toma, UNRWA’s director of communications.

Every time there is a convoy, the GPS coordinates of the routes are shared, as are the names and nationalities of the members, the contents of the convoy, the vehicle details, and their estimated arrival and departure time, Ms Toma said. The convoy is also in constant communication with the Israeli army, she added.

Smoke rises following Israeli airstrikes in the Gaza Strip (AP)

The Israeli military has yet to reply to a request for comment about the attacks on UNRWA, though it has told CNN that it is looking into the 5 February incident.

HRW also documented an attack on 20 February on an MSF guest house in the al-Mawasi neighbourhood, which has been identified as a humanitarian zone by Israel. The coordinates had been shared with the Israeli authorities. HRW concluded that an Israeli tank had fired a medium to large-calibre weapon at the multistorey apartment building housing 64 people, all of whom were MSF staff and their families.

The attack killed two people and injured seven others. MSF alleged that the weapon was an Israeli tank shell. It said its staff had seen no military objects in the area at the time and received no warning.

The ANERA aid organisation alleged that an Israeli strike hit the building in al-Zuwaida where Mousa Shawwa, their supply and logistics coordinator, was sheltering, despite its coordinates having been shared with the military.

“We did not receive any warning from the Israelis before the attack,” Mr Shawwa’s wife Doaa told HRW. “This is the thing that upsets me the most. My husband works for an American organisation and the Israelis knew we were there. They should have sent us a message to warn us to get out. Why didn’t they?”

Ms Ingram, from Unicef, said she was involved in an aid convoy, coordinated with the Israeli military, that was heading north on 11 April. They were asked to pull into a holding area at the Wadi Gaza checkpoint in the centre of the besieged strip, where they came under gunfire from the direction of the Israeli checkpoint.

Ms Ingram said three bullets hit her car: one hit the side window, one hit the door, and the third hit the bonnet of the car. She survived as she was in an armoured vehicle.

In the end they had to turn the convoy round.

“We have only had five missions to the north of Gaza this year as Unicef, which is nowhere near enough, and they weren’t large convoys,” she said. “There’s an ongoing problem with the number of coordinated missions that are being facilitated, let alone the dangers and delays faced on missions that are facilitated.”

The Independent reached out to the Israeli military for comment about this incident. The military said that “after an operational examination by the commanders, it appears that the IDF forces who were closest to the area were not within firing range of the convoy at the time and place indicated, and it was found that no fire was carried out at the vehicle by the IDF forces as described in the question”.

HRW has said that governments – including that of the UK – who continue to provide arms to the Israeli government risk complicity in potential war crimes. It urged them to instead use their leverage, including through targeted sanctions, to press Israeli authorities to cease such strikes and enable the provision of humanitarian aid and basic services in Gaza.

“On one hand, Israel is blocking access to critical lifesaving humanitarian provisions, and on the other, attacking convoys that are delivering some of the small amount that they are allowing in,” Ms Wille said. “Israeli forces should immediately end their attacks on aid organisations, and there should be accountability.”


Family pay tribute to ‘larger than life’ aid worker killed in Israeli air strike

Harry Stedman, PA
Fri, 17 May 2024 



The family of a British man killed in an Israeli air strike in Gaza have paid tribute to his “larger than life presence” and his “legacy”.

James ‘Jim’ Henderson, 33, was among seven World Central Kitchen (WCK) workers who died when their convoy was hit outside the Deir al-Balah warehouse last month.

In a statement released by Devon & Cornwall Police, his family described him as an “incredible man” who had “died doing something that mattered to him”.

They added they would “never comprehend his loss” as the former Royal Marine had “so much more to achieve in his life”.

Mr Henderson, from Cornwall, formed part of WCK’s security detail and died alongside fellow British veterans John Chapman, 57, and James Kirby, 47.

The family statement said: “It’s not the size of the candle but the brightness of its flame that counts and this couldn’t be more true than when we think about Jim.

“Whilst he was taken from us far too soon, and with so much more to achieve in his life, we gain comfort in knowing that he lived every minute of his time on earth, to the fullest extent.”

James had a strong passion for rugby and “followed his dreams” by joining The Royal Marines and seeing front-line action in Afghanistan, while “people” were at the heart of everything he did and drove him to “be better”, his family said.

The statement continued: “It was this drive that took him to Gaza in support of World Central Kitchen, and those so badly affected by the conflict in the region.

“Whilst we will never comprehend his loss, we know that he died doing something that mattered to him, he was making a difference and for that, at least, we are grateful.

“Above all others, those that mattered most to Jim were his fiancee Jacqui, and his family. ‘Proud’ does not come close to expressing how we all feel for what Jim achieved, and we know would have gone to achieve.

“Whilst mourning the loss of him, and what he would have undoubtedly continued to do with his life, we also reflect on his legacy and the many people who will continue to benefit from what he started.

We love him. We miss him. We celebrate his achievements.

“We know that his flame will continue to burn brightly in each and every one of us as we look to a future without his larger than life presence in it.”

Mr Henderson’s funeral will take place in Truro, Cornwall on May 22.

The funeral of his colleague Mr Kirby was attended by hundreds of people in Bristol on Wednesday.

The Israel Defence Forces (IDF) dismissed two officers and reprimanded three others over the incident, calling it a “serious mistake”.


UPDATE 1-UN aid chief warns on Gaza food supplies, says relief work 'unplannable'


Emma Farge
Thu, 16 May 2024 

*

Says famine is an 'immediate' risk in Gaza

*

Aid flows into southern Gaza have dried up

*

Griffiths to step down in June

*

'It's a world which has lost its way'


By Emma Farge

GENEVA, May 16 (Reuters) - The U.N. aid chief warned on Thursday that famine was an immediate risk in Gaza with food stocks running out, describing fresh challenges since the start of the Israel's Rafah operation that made planning and distributing relief almost impossible.

As Israel has pounded southern Gaza, some 600,000 people or about half of the uprooted population sheltering there have fled to other areas of the besieged enclave, sometimes returning to bombed-out houses or empty fields.


Martin Griffiths said the global body was struggling to help them, with imports of aid all but halted through southern Gaza and fresh fighting adding to distribution challenges.

"Stocks of food which were in place already in southern Gaza are running out. I think we're talking about almost none left," Griffiths told Reuters in an interview in Geneva.

"And so the humanitarian operation is stuck, it's completely stuck. We can't do what we want to do," he said, calling the relief operation "unplannable".

Israel's military says its operation in Rafah is meant to kill Hamas fighters and dismantle infrastructure used by the group, which governs the blockaded Palestinian territory. Israel accuses Hamas of diverting aid, something the group denies.

Griffiths had previously warned that a military operation in Rafah would be deadly and put the U.N.'s fragile humanitarian operation "at death's door".

"What I think is so deeply, deeply tragic is that all the predictions that so many people, including us, but so many other member states and society have made about the consequences of an operation in Rafah are coming true," he said.

People who had moved to areas such as Al-Mawasi had no food or water and tents had run out, he added. "What is the hope for these people? They don't know what's coming next."

'ANGRY WORLD'

Aid officials have repeatedly warned of famine in the seven-month conflict, though their fears ebbed slightly in April as Israel ceded to international pressure to boost supplies.

Israel says U.N. agencies are to blame for not distributing aid more efficiently within the enclave, creating backlogs of supplies.

Asked about the current risk of famine, Griffiths said: "I think it's an immediate, clear and present danger because of the facts on the ground tell us we don't need to be scientists to see the consequence of the removal of food."

Griffiths, a British former diplomat who has also worked as a conflict mediator, is set to step down next month for health reasons after three years as the head of the UN's humanitarian branch which manages a multi-billion-dollar relief budget.

Griffiths voiced concern for the future given the high number of conflicts in what he described as an "angry world".

"It has never been as bad as this," he said.

"I'm very worried, I think that it's a world which has lost its way and we need to help find its way back to those norms that we all lived to create," he said. (Reporting by Emma Farge; Editing by William Maclean and Andrew Heavens)
Coal Plant Fought by K-Pop Fans Fires Up in South Korea

Heesu Lee
Thu, 16 May 2024


(Bloomberg) -- A coal-fired power project in South Korea that drew major opposition from environmentalists and K-Pop fans is beginning operations this week.

Samcheok Blue Power Co.’s facility started commercial operations Friday, according to the company. The facility — South Korea’s seventh-largest coal plant — is close to Maengbang beach, the site of an iconic photo shoot for the sleeve of BTS’s 2021 hit song Butter and now a pilgrimage site for fans.

South Korea has pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40% from 2018 levels by 2030 and is targeting phasing out coal power by 2050, though it’s making little progress toward those goals, Global Energy Monitor said in a report last month.

Read More: BTS Fans Are Fighting Big Coal to Save Beach Made Famous by Band

The addition of new coal capacity highlights the country’s difficulties in shifting toward solar and wind, a factor that’s posed hurdles for businesses seeking cleaner energy, such as Samsung Electronics Co. and Hyundai Motor Co.

Coal was the nation’s largest source of electricity in 2022, at almost a third of the total, according to data compiled by BloombergNEF. The polluting fuel is forecast to provide about 20% of generation by the end of the decade.

The Samcheok coal station, which has a combined capacity of 2.1 gigawatts, began operating one of its two units Friday, according to a company official.
Dutch far-Right government set for immigration showdown with EU

James Crisp
TELEGRAPH 
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Geert Wilders, the Party for Freedom (PVV) leader, after the presentation of the agreement for a new cabinet, in the Hague, on Thursday - ROBIN VAN LONKUIJSEN/EPA-EFE/Shutterstock


Geert Wilders said that he would implement the Netherlands’ “strictest-ever” migration policy, as the new Dutch government pledged to quit EU asylum rules, on Thursday.

The plan to opt out of the European laws has put Mr Wilders’ incoming four-party Right-wing coalition government on a collision course with Brussels before it has even taken office.

The firebrand, notorious for his fiercely anti-Islam rhetoric and calls to ban the Koran, won a shock victory in a general election six months ago.


It took until Wednesday before negotiations with the pro-business VVD, the “radical centrist” New Social Contract, and the BBB farmers’ party ended with agreement on a plan for government.

“The sun will shine again in the Netherlands,” Mr Wilders, the founder and leader of the Freedom Party (PVV), said.

“I think that anyone who reads the agreement between us four will see that a lot is going to change in the Netherlands,” he added and predicted “the strictest asylum policy ever”.

Shoulder to shoulder: Geert Wilders (PVV), Dilan Yesilgoz (VVD), Caroline van der Plas (BBB) and Pieter Omtzigt (NSC) present the agreement of their four parties for a new cabinet, at the Hague, on Thursday - Hollandse Hoogte/Shutterstock

He said there would be a two-year asylum crisis act to drive down numbers arriving in the Netherlands.

The government plans call for a maximum reduction in migrant numbers without giving a hard figure. The agreement includes austere reception centres, a hold on processing asylum applications and only temporary asylum being granted.

“An opt out clause for European asylum and migration policies will be submitted as soon as possible to the European Commission,” the coalition said in its pact.

Mr Wilders said the plan would make the Netherlands less attractive for asylum seekers, adding that “people in Africa and the Middle East will start thinking they might be better off elsewhere”.

The coalition says it would also strive to limit free movement for people from countries joining the EU in the future.

Frans Timmermans, leader of the opposition GreenLeft–Labour party, said the pact was 'disastrous', on Thursday - ROBIN VAN LONKHUIJSEN/AFP

Frans Timmermans, the former EU climate chief and leader of the opposition GreenLeft–Labour party, said the pact was “disastrous”.

Mr Wilders, an ardent eurosceptic, was forced to ditch a campaign promise to hold a Brexit-style Nexit referendum and sacrifice his hopes of being prime minister to get the deal over the line.

The prime minister has not yet been named but the leaders of the other parties are also ruled out.

One name being mentioned is Ronald Plasterk, a former Labour minister who chaired an earlier round of coalition negotiations.
‘Truss lettuce’ stands for prime minister

However, some commentators are sceptical that the new government will last. One podcast, inspired by a British newspaper stunt over Liz Truss’s ill-fated premiership, has already set up a lettuce in competition with Mr Plasterk to see which lasts longest.

The Netherlands joins Hungary and Poland’s previous nationalist government in challenging EU migration policy.

Brussels will resist, as EU countries have already agreed on their migration pact and opt outs are usually discussed in the negotiating phase.

“We have a new pact on migration and asylum, which has been voted upon and confirmed and therefore has to be applied,” the European Commission’s chief spokesman said in Brussels.

“This legislation will be applied and the commission will play its role in making sure it is.”



New Dutch coalition aims to reintroduce 80mph limit in cull of climate goals

Senay Boztas in Amsterdam
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Netherlands' party leaders of the new coalition government (from left): Caroline van der Plas (Farmer-Citizen), Pieter Omtzigt (New Social Contract),
Dilan Yeşilgöz (Freedom and Democracy) and Geert Wilders (Party for Freedom).Photograph: Sem van der Wal/ANP/AFP/Getty ImagesMore


The Netherlands’ new right-wing coalition government aims to reintroduce daytime speeds of 80mph on motorways as part of a number of proposed changes to the country’s environmental policies which have sparked concern.

The move echoes the anti-green stance of other right-wing parties across the continent, as environmental issues become popular bogeymen for populist politicians. In Germany, for example, heat pumps have been politicised, as members of the far-right party AfD have called the Green party “our enemies’.

Related: The EU’s great green retreat benefits the far right. For the rest of us, it’s a looming disaster | Arthur Neslen

On Thursday morning, the far-right politician Geert Wilders announced that his anti-Islam, anti-immigration Party for Freedom was forming a coalition with the centre-right People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD), pro-reform party New Social Contract and the Farmer-Citizen Movement.

A 26-page coalition accord titled “hope, guts and pride” outlined measures aiming to reduce migration, introduce constitutional reform, address a housing and cost-of-living crisis and row back on climate change and pollution policy.

Under previous governments, the Netherlands was seen as one of the forerunners of Europe in adopting renewable energy sources – especially in solar power – and planning to drastically reduce animal farming to address its manure-based pollution problem. But, although the small, low-lying country would be partially submerged without action on rising sea levels and river flood risk, there is little in the accord on climate change.

Echoing far-right sentiment across Europe, Wilders’ own manifesto pledged to give “no billions to unnecessary climate and nitrogen pollution policy” and “stop the hysterical reduction of CO2”, while putting climate rules through the shredder. “For decades, we have been made to fear climate change and although the predicted disaster scenarios – over the whole world – were supposed to get more and more extreme, none of them have happened,” it claimed.

He did not gain enough cross-party support to become prime minister and the coalition will have an experimental structure, recruiting 50% of ministers from business. A multi-year climate change fund remains, although with €1.2bn less invested in the next four years.

Daytime motorway speeds, which had been reduced to 62mph to reduce nitrogen compound pollution, will return to 80mph (130km an hour) “where possible”, subsidised “red diesel” will be reintroduced for farmers from 2027, certain manure pollution measures will be scrapped and the coalition pledges not to enforce compulsory animal farm closures.

Targets for the introduction of heat pumps will be abandoned, and four nuclear plants will be built.

Caroline van der Plas, the leader of the Farmer-Citizen Movement – for the first time representing farmers in government – said: “High-quality agriculture is being protected, and that’s necessary because we have a problem with food security in the world. Dutch farmers don’t have to feed the world, but farmers in the Netherlands can help.”

Left-wing leaders and climate activists were immediately sceptical, pointing out that the coalition also has no majority in the Senate. Frans Timmermans, the leader of the Green Left-Labour alliance – second-largest party in parliament – and former head of Europe’s Green Deal, told Dutch media the EU would never agree to Dutch exemptions: “They say …‘We’ll go to Brussels because we don’t want to keep to the rules about nitrogen’. Brussels will see you coming. You always ask other member states to stick to the rules but you don’t want to do that yourself. Honestly, it is not going to happen.”

Marjan Minnesma, the director of Urgenda, which won a legal battle to make the Dutch state reduce carbon emissions, said the accord risked a stream of court cases. “Previous ministers have tried to do all they can by derogation [provisions within EU law] for agriculture and nitrogen-based emissions … and it’s easy to say you will just stop, but an awful lot is built on EU law,” she told NPO Radio1. “But we are also dependent on the EU because the same farmers export most of their products. This is largely gesture politics.”