Afternoon summary
Wes Streeting, the health secretary, has said that Labour’s decision to adopt a “practical, technocratic approach” to governing is a problem, in implied criticism of Keir Starmer. (See 1.28pm.)
For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.
Updated
Here is John Crace’s sketch on the Commons UQ earlier on President Trump’s new national security strategy.
MHCLG publishes plan to halve rate of long-term rough sleeping in England before next election
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has now published the full text of its plan to end homelessness.
And here is MHCLG’s summary of the key goals for the end of this parliament.
-Increase the rate of prevention to protect thousands more households from homelessness. Central to this target is a proposed ‘Duty to Collaborate’, which will be brought forward in legislation for public bodies to work together to prevent homelessness. This builds on cross-government efforts to cut homelessness linked to prisons, social care and hospitals. This strategy sets clear targets on this issue for the first time, including halving the number who become homeless on their first night out of prison and ensuring that no eligible person is discharged to the street after a hospital stay. It also sets a clear long-term ambition that no one should be made homelessness from a public institution.
-Halve the number of people experiencing long-term rough sleeping. For too long, people who have spent years on the streets, often with the most complex needs, have been left with no help. This strategy rewires the system to focus support where it’s needed most. A new £124m supported housing scheme has been launched to get over 2,500 people across England off the streets and into more stable housing as well as preventing those from getting to the streets in the first place. The Plan also includes a new £15m Long-Term Rough Sleeping Innovation Programme, which will help councils develop fresh solutions, alongside £37m of funding for a new Ending Homelessness in Communities programme which will increase support and improve the vital services that are provided by the voluntary, community and faith sector at the frontline of this crisis.
-End the unlawful use of B&Bs for families. This will bring relief to the 2,070 households trapped beyond the six-week limit in unsuitable conditions – often in one room and no cooking facilities. The builds on the commitment in the recently published Child Poverty Strategy, which ensures mothers and newborn babies are not discharged from hospital into this B&B accommodation.
And this chart shows the trend for long-term rough sleeping. It is from the annex to the national plan. Long-term rough sleeping is defined as when “someone has been seen sleeping rough recently and has also been seen on at least three separate months over the past year”.
Lifetime impact of people with skilled worker visas 'clearly fiscally postive' for UK, Migration Advisory Committee says
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, is determined to persuade the public that immigration is making Britain poorer. Today the Migration Advisory Committee, the government’s main expert advisory body, has published a report that does a lot to disprove what Farage is claiming.
The MAC has looked at the lifetime fiscal contribution made by a particular group of immigrants – people on skilled worker (SW) visas, and their dependents. It covers the 2022-23 cohort, when these visas were available to health and care workers.
And it says that, overall, their lifetime contribution to the British economy is “clearly fiscally positive”.
The lifetime figure takes into account the fact that some arrivals will stay for good and that, while working-age people tend to be net contributors to the state, children and the very elderly tend to be net beneficiaries. The MAC admits that its report relies on some assumptions where there is a lot of uncertainty, but it says this is its “first comprehensive analysis of the fiscal contribution of a particular visa route”.
The MAC says high earners on SW visas make a particularly valuable contribution. But even lower-earners are net contributors, it says. It says the only people who are not net contributors are care workers.
The MAC sums up the picture by saying:
Overall, the SW visa route is clearly fiscally positive for the UK. This is almost inevitable given that main applicants on the route must have a job offer paying above a set of salary thresholds. This means that these migrants have higher employment rates than UK residents since employment is a condition of the visa and as we shall demonstrate, salaries on the SW route are significantly higher than UK average wages. For the 2022-23 cohort as a whole, we estimate a present value net fiscal contribution of around £47bn over their lifetime. However, this estimate hides very substantial heterogeneity. The entire positive contribution comes from main applicants – particularly those outside of H&C [health and care workers – a subset of the SW route].
This chart shows the static net fiscal contribution for 2022-23 – the amount people contributed in tax, minus the amount they received in public services, that year. It shows that main applicants on SW visas (even H&C ones) are net contributors. But adult dependents of SW main applicants are only just net contributors, and their children, like British children, are net beneficiaries.
But the MAC also estimates the lifetime costs for this group. Explaining how it does this, it says:
Table 23 reports the estimated totals for the 2022-23 cohort. For the entire cohort of 329,200 arrivals, we estimate that they will contribute a net £47.1bn over their lifetime – or +£143,000 per migrant. This is almost entirely driven by main applicants working outside of health and care. The small overall negative contributions for SW (excl. H&C) dependants (-£700m) are little more than a rounding error compared to the large positive contribution of the main applicants. In contrast, the overall net fiscal contribution of H&C visas is only just positive – the positive contribution (+£5.5bn) from the main applicants just offsets the negative contribution from dependants. It is important to note that the relatively low overall positive contribution of H&C main applicants is a result of care workers being able to use the route at that time. These workers are much lower paid than other H&C workers and the average UK worker. Care worker main applicants have a total lifetime negative contribution of £2bn compared to a positive contribution of £7.5bn for other H&C workers. Recall also that the average UK resident will make a negative contribution over their lifetime. And again, these calculations ignore all the potential additional social value that health and care workers provide.
Updated
The Lib Dem MP Charlie Maynard has been told to apologise after an inquiry found that he broke Commons rule by failing to declare pro bono legal advice he received on time in the register of members’ interests. The legal advice, worth more than £500,000, related to a legal case in which Maynard was given permission to argue, representing the public interest, that a bailout for Thames Water should be blocked and that it should be put into special administration instead.
Maynard referred himself to the parliamentary commissioner for standards after the Guido Fawkes website revealed that the pro bono advice had not been declared.
In a report, the Commons standards committee said: “We recommend that Mr Maynard should make an apology to the house … and that he commit to take a more diligent approach to the registration of his interests in future.”
Councillors 'violently intimidated' by people in balaclavas at meeting to discuss sanctuary plan for asylum seekers, MPs told
Councillors in Kent were “violently intimidated” and “pelted with eggs” at a meeting by people wearing balaclavas in the public gallery, MPs have been told. The incident happened as Swale borough council was debating making their area a “District of Sanctuary” for asylum seekers in the meeting on Wednesday evening, PA Media reports.
Kevin McKenna, the Labour MP for Sittingbourne and Sheppey, raised this during business questions in the Commons. He said:
I’m horrified to report to you and to the house as a whole that last night in Swale Borough Council there were violent scenes as people wearing balaclavas in the public gallery itself violently intimidated councillors.
They were threatening them, pelting them with eggs and missiles from the gallery.
This is an attack on democracy itself. This is an attack on free speech. This is an attack on my constituents.
The building was so badly vandalised afterwards, with toilets flooded, lifts destroyed.
It can’t be used today and is not open. My constituents cannot access council services because of these actions.
Our democracy is based on the ability to disagree with each other strongly, but never violently.
Kent police told PA they had attended a reported disturbance at the council meeting, and received reports of criminal damage and a common assault.
If Nigel Farage is getting a bit fed up with the large number of people joining his party who turn out to be undistinguished former Tory MPs, he might be more impressed with his latest recruit; in a column in the Spectator, the celebrity sex worker and successful internet entrepreneur Bonnie Blue says she is now supporting Reform UK – partly because of their policy on inheritance tax.
She says:
You shouldn’t have to pay any inheritance tax, as you’ve already been taxed on that money. When my grandad died, it was particularly sad because he was too young for my grandma to receive his pension. That’s disgusting. Reform has sensible positions on immigration and inheritance tax, so I stand with Nigel Farage.
Here is some more comment on the Ben Bradley defection from the Conservatives to Reform UK. (See 10.31am.)
From James Ball, political editor at the New World
There is a risk to Reform that if they take too many Tories they just start to resemble the 14-year government that the public resoundingly rejected last year. Not sure they’re really thinking through these defections…
From Robert Shrimsley, the Financial Times’ chief political commentator
If the Tories do manage to get through their slump - and it’s a big if - they will have sloughed off almost all the dregs of their party
Shrimsley is thinking of stories like this one.
Streeting blames McSweeney's target seat focus in 2024 campaign for fact he almost lost in Ilford North
In his New Statesman interview (see 1.28pm), Wes Streeting, the health secretary, also blamed Morgan McSweeney, who is now Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, for the fact that he came close to losing his seat at the last election.
Streeting represents Ilford North, a marginal seat in north-east London. In 2019 he had a majority of more than 5,000, but last year his majority was slashed to 528 and he was almost beaten by Leanne Mohamad, one of the many independent candidates who did very well in constituencies with significant numbers of Muslim voters by campaigning primarily on the issue of Gaza.
McSweeney was running Labour’s election campaign and he told MPs seeking re-election that they should be campaigning in target seats, not spending time in their own constituencies. Streeting told the New Statesman that he wanted to ignore this rule, but that he received “a proper bollocking from one of the leaders of our general election campaign” who told him he had to campaign elsewhere.
Streeting said:
[My] mistake was listening to the national machine when I should have followed my own gut instinct. I will not make that mistake again.
Streeting and McSweeney clashed again more recently, after McSweeney was implicated in Downing Street briefings implying Streeting was plotting against Starmer.
If you are interested in Mohamad, she is one of several figures involved in Jeremy Corbyn’s new Your Party interviewed for a book about it, Your Party: The Return of the Left, edited by Oliver Eagleton. The book covers the splits in the party, but it goes well beyond that and interviews are revealing about the ideas motivating the party’s founders. Mohamad said she almost won in Ilford North because people were fed up with two-party politics. She said:
The message I heard constantly was that the two-party system was not delivering. There was a very deep, very disturbing sense of betrayal: a frustration with flip-flopping between the same groups of self-serving politicians, neither of which has done anything to improve people’s lives. That is why so many people were willing to turn to an independent alternative.
The book says, if there were an election in the constituency now, Mohamad would be projected to win with a majority of almost 4,000.
Updated
Downing Street vows to force employment rights bill through Lords
The government has vowed that there will be no more concessions on the employment rights bill and that it will force the Lords to vote on it again next week, after Conservative and cross-bench peers blocked it on Wednesday night, Jessica Elgot reports.
Keir Starmer has said that reliable bus services “shouldn’t cost the earth” in remarks released ahead of a visit today to promote government spending on buses.
The PM went to Norwich to publicise investment in bus services, including to extend the £3 bus fare cap in England until 2027. He said:
Buses are crucial to our communities – for many it’s how we commute to work, take the kids to school or even help us get home safely after a Christmas tipple.
Reliable bus travel shouldn’t cost the earth – and without it, the threads that hold urban and rural communities together around Norfolk would unravel.
The government is spending £3bn on buses, including £46m allocated for Norfolk.
No 10 dismisses claim that Streeting's jibe about 'technocratic approach' to governing is implied criticism of Starmer
Wes Streeting, the health secretary, has said that Labour’s decision to adopt a “practical, technocratic approach” to governing is causing a problem.
In an interview with the New Statesman, he suggested that this is one reason why the party is doing so badly in the polls, and he admitted that he was “frustrated” about this.
His comments will be seen as implied criticism of Keir Starmer and a clear indication of the pitch he would make in a future leadership contest. Many Labour MPs believe that Starmer will be replaced before the next election, and Streeting is one of the leading candidates to replace him.
In an interview with Ailbhe Rea, the magazine’s political editor, Streeting said that he was not happy with the way the government is performing. He said:
I’m pretty frustrated, to be honest. I feel like on one hand, since we’ve come into government, we’ve actually done a huge amount that we said we’d do … But that’s not reflected in the polls, and I don’t think it’s even reflected in our storytelling. I think we sell ourselves short.
Streeting said that one problem was that Labour was presenting itself as the “maintenance department for the country”. He explained:
The problem with that kind of practical, technocratic approach is that if someone else comes along and says, ‘Well, I’ve got a maintenance company too, and mine’s cheaper,’ why wouldn’t people go, ‘OK, well, we’ll give that maintenance team a try’?
Streeting said that he thought Labour needed to put more emphasis on values, and not just policy implementation. On health, he claimed that what mattered at the next election would not be “who’s going to be more effective at cutting the waiting lists”, but instead “who believes in a National Health Service and its fundamental values”.
He said Labour should be “a party of both the left and the centre”. And he said beating Reform UK would have to involve highlighting Labour values. He explained:
We’re certainly not going to win by out-reforming Reform. And we will certainly not be true to our values and our soul if we try and out-reform Reform.
We can take them on and beat them with values-driven Labour arguments. We can reunite the centre and the left, and I think that is the historic responsibility that we have.
It will be Labour or Reform, and that is a battle not just between left and right, but between right and wrong, between progressives and reactionaries, and between hope or hate. We cannot let them win.
Asked about the interview at the Downing Street lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson rejected suggestions that Streeting’s comments highlighted a division over strategy within government. He said:
I think what the health secretary is setting out is that the public voted for change. That’s what they want to see delivered, and again, that is exactly what the government is focused on doing. The government is united behind a manifesto of change.
In the New Statesman, Rea ended her article with a lovely line about Streeting’s ambitions. She writes;
Is 2026 the year he becomes prime minister? Streeting laughs. Then there is a long pause. “I’m definitely not indulging any of that. I think we had quite enough of that with the drive-by the other week. The level of silliness we saw [then] was like panto season come early. So I think the answer to your question is: oh no, he’s not.” Streeting knows his panto, though. And he knows what the audience shouts back.
No 10 says government remains committed to further Lords reform
The appointment of 34 new political peers last night has led to claims that the government is stalling on its commitment to proper Lords reform. (See 10.36am.)
But, at the No 10 lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson rejected this claim. He said the bill to remove the remaining hereditary peers from the Lords, which is due to become law before the end of this parliamentary session, was “the first step in reform of the second chamber”. He said the government remains committed to replacing the current Lords with “an alternative second chamber that is more representative of the nations and regions”.
Updated
Downing Street has said the government remains committed to passing the employment rights bill before Christmas – but it has not ruled out further concessions to get the legislation through the Lords.
Asked specifically if further compromise was likely after the surprise defeat last night (see 8.42am), the PM’s spokesperson told reporters at the lobby briefing:
We have always said since the outset we would always work with all parties, trade unions, businesses … in order to deliver the employment rights bill.
But the spokesperson did defend the government’s decision to change the bill at the last minute to remove the cap on the compensation that can be paid to someone who wins a claim for unfair dismissal. It was this change that triggered the Lords defeat last night.
The spokesperson said:
On this compensation specifically, these changes ensure employees who have been unfairly dismissed are properly compensated for their losses, remove incentives for unnecessarily complex claims, and make it quicker and easier for tribunals to deliver fair outcomes. Independent tribunals will still decide compensation awards based on the facts and in reality most awards fall far below the existing cap of around £118,000.
We remain committed to passing this bill before Christmas and will work with the unions businesses and legislators to get this done in line with our implementation road map.
UPDATE: In private, government sources are saying there will be no further concessions. See 2.05pm.
Updated
Starmer urges resident doctors in England to 'do the responsible thing' and call off planned strike
Keir Starmer has also urged resident doctors to “do the responsible thing” and call off their planned strike in England.
Referring to the BMA’s decision to consult doctors on the latest offer from government ahead of the proposed five-day strike due to start on Wednesday next week, Starmer said:
I’m very concerned with the action of the BMA. They are being irresponsible in my view. We have already put in place quite a significant pay rise.
There are other issues that they’re concerned about, which we’ve been listening to, and we put an offer on the table to deal with those issues, but that offer can only go forward if they don’t take strike action, particularly in the run-up to Christmas, particularly when we’ve got a problem with flu.
It’d be irresponsible with BMA to push through, and I think for many resident doctors, I think in their heart of hearts, they probably don’t want to do this.
So I’d just say to the BMA, do the responsible thing, accept the offer that’s on the table, and we can all move forward.
Starmer says people should apply 'common sense' about flu risk, but guidance on face masks not being changed
Keir Starmer has said that the government is not issuing new guidance on face masks in the light of the flu threat this winter, but that he does expect people to use common sense.
Asked if the government would be advising people to wear face masks, Starmer told broadcasters while he was on a visit in Norfolk:
As far as the flu is concerned, there’s a winter plan in place, and I had a briefing on that the day before last in terms of the robustness of the plan.
I want to thank all the NHS staff who always step up during the winter period to deal with flu or whatever else. We do need to take precautions.
There’s no difference in the guidance, so we’re not changing guidance on face masks.
But the usual things about ventilation, washing hands and just being careful when you’re around people who are vulnerable is the guidance. It’s common sense, and I think most people would want to behave in that way.
Some health leaders have said that, if people are likely to be coughing or sneezing in public, they should wear a face mask. That prompted Kemi Badenoch to say that she did not like telling people to wear face masks, because they can “a barrier to social interaction”, but that she did think people should exercise common sense and that, if they were ill, they should stay in bed.
As Tobi Thomas reports, the number of people in hospital in England with flu has risen by 55% in a week.
I have updated the post at 11.03am with the full, direct quote from Matt Western about the US national security strategy. You may need to refresh the page to get the update to appear.
Trump's strategy plan contains echoes of 'extreme rightwing tropes' from 1930s, former cabinet minister tells MPs
The Trump security strategy paper contains language reminiscent of 1930s Germany, MPs were told.
Liam Byrne, a former Labour cabinet minister and the chair of the Commons business committee, made the suggestion as he said the shift in US policy meant it was even more important for the UK to strengthen economic security links with the EU.
Speaking during the urgent question, he said:
The language of the US national security strategy was deeply regrettable and, frankly, it was not hard to see the rhymes with some extreme rightwing tropes that date back to the 1930s.
Byrne said the publication of the document coincided with talks on the UK joining the EU’s Safe (Security Action for Europe) defence loans programme broke down. He said the government should adopt the recommendations in his committee’s report on economic security, and he said the UK should open talks with the EU on the sort of economic security union that could provide Europe with the growth “that rearmament is going to require”.
Byrne was clearly referring to 1930s Germany in his opening comment, and to Nazi thinking about racial purity. There are echoes of this in the new US national security strategy where it talks about Europe facing “civilisational erasure” in part because of migration. It says:
Economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilizational erasure. The larger issues facing Europe include activities of the European Union and other transnational bodies that undermine political liberty and sovereignty, migration policies that are transforming the continent and creating strife, censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition, cratering birthrates, and loss of national identities and self-confidence.
Should present trends continue, the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less …
Over the long term, it is more than plausible that within a few decades at the latest, certain Nato members will become majority non-European.
In response, Malhotra said she agreed with Byrne that it was important for the UK to further develop its own defence capabilities.
Updated
Lib Dems call for review of UK's security strategy in light of Trump's foreign policy shift
Calum Miller, the Lib Dem foreign affairs spokesperson, said that President Trump has driven a “coach and horses” through the alliance with Europe with this document.
He called for an urgent review of the government’s strategy in response to this.
And he asked the minister to state clearly that the UK will not tolerate American interference in elections.
And he asked if the elections bill will deal with the threat of foreign interference.
Malhotra said national security was the priority for the government. She said it was important to recognise that Trump is making efforts to promote peace around the world.
Chi Onwurah (Lab) told Malhotra that she thought she was too discreet to say what she really thought about Trump. But she asked if the government accepted that any defence capability reliant on the US would not be a sovereign capability.
Malhotra said that the UK respected the US as a democracy, and that friends and allies should respect each other’s choices.
Speaking for the Conservatives, Mike Wood, a shadow Cabinet Office minister, did not say anything directly critical of the Trump document. Instead, he asked for confirmation that the government will raise defence spending, and sought an update on Ukraine policy.
Trump's threat to interfere in European elections in new US security strategy 'chilling', MPs told
Matt Western, the Labour chair of the joint committee on national security strategy, told MPs that the Trump document showed that the US consensus that has led the world since the second world war has been “shattered”.
And he said the implication that the US will interfer in European elections is “chilling”.
He criticised Trump for his comments about Sadiq Khan in a recent interview.
And he said he was worried there was no criticism of Russia in the Trump document.
He said he did not expect the government to criticise Trump.
But he wanted to know if the government’s national security strategy is being updated in the light of this document.
Malhotra said it was for the US to set its strategy.
She said there were elements of the strategy that the UK agrees with, such as the importance of Europe providing for its own defence. But there are some aspects of it the government disagrees with, she said.
Referring to Khan, she said he was doing a great job for London – and she disagreed with what Trump said.
UPDATE: Western said:
The whole house should be under no illusion, the United States consensus that has led the western world since the second world war appears shattered.
It refers to Europe facing, and I quote, ‘civilisational erasure’, and it will be unrecognisable in 20 years. It vows to, and I quote again, ‘to help Europe correct its current trajectory and promote patriotic European parties’.
The prospect of United States interference in the democratic politics of Europe, I believe, is chilling.
The president’s comments on Tuesday further demonstrate this, he called European leaders weak and singled out one of the United Kingdom’s mayors as, I quote, ‘horrible, vicious and disgusting’.
But sometimes what is not said is as important as is what is said. In this case, the absence of condemnation for Russia is extraordinary, though not surprising.
Given certain UK dependencies on the United States, this leaves the United Kingdom especially vulnerable.
Updated
Minister tells MPs UK governments takes 'a different view' from US on some aspects of Trump's national security strategy
Seema Malhotra, a Foreign Office minister, is responding to the urgent question about President Trump’s national security strategy (even though it was addressed to the Cabinet Office – see 10.12am.)
The Trump document was published at the end of last week. Peter Beaumont has an analysis of it here.
Malhotra said all MPs would agree the US/UK relationship has delivered security for more than a century.
She said the PM and President Trump have both emphasised their commitment to this relationship.
The US strategy has many aspects, she said. But “on some areas we take a different view”, she said.
She said the UK government sees Europe as strong. And it recognises that Europe is spending more on defence.
Europe is united behind Ukraine, and behind its values of freedom and democracy, she said.
She said trade links between the UK and the US were strong, and the UK would continue to develop that. Having a strong relationship allows the UK to discuss issues “where we disagree”, she said.
The TSSA transport union has joined the FBU (see 9.49am) in saying parliament should sit at the weekend if necessary to get the employment rights bill onto the statute book. Its general secretary, Maryam Eslamdoust, said:
The Labour government must now treat this an emergency and override the Lords’ attempts to override democracy.
It’s imperative that the bill is delivered in full by Christmas, even if that means the Commons sitting at weekends to ensure it passes.
Electoral Reform Society says it's 'ridiculous' that Starmer has created more peers than he's removed
Coming back to the House of Lords, Darren Hughes, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society, issued this statement criticising the appointment of more political peers yesterday. (See 8.42am.)
Keir Starmer himself not long ago described the wholly unelected and grossly bloated House of Lords as ‘indefensible’. Nothing has changed since then so it is deeply disappointing to see even more peers being stuffed into the upper chamber.
Firstly, it is absurd for the Lords, which at more than 800 peers is already the second largest legislative chamber after China’s National People’s Congress, to be getting even more members. It is also patently ridiculous that the government has now added more peers into the Lords than the 92 hereditary peers it is in the process of removing.
The ending of the remaining hereditary peers is a step in the right direction, as people should not be making our laws because of who their parents were. But [the new peerages] highlight just how unsustainable a wholly unelected and unrestrained chamber is.
Former Tory MP Ben Bradley defects to Reform UK, saying his old party 'failed to deliver'
The former Tory MP Ben Bradley has defected to Reform UK.
Bradley, who lost his Mansfield seat at last year’s general election and who is also a former Nottinghamshire county council leader, has been appointed as Reform’s “head of local government action” to help cut council spending, the party said.
Bradley said:
Successive governments have failed to deliver for so many people, and have demonstrated that they’re unwilling to actually deliver on key promises to voters.
They have talked about being tough on crime, reducing immigration, about helping working people, whilst in practice they’ve failed to act and have delivered the opposite. The trust in those parties has gone, and it’s not coming back.
I’ve been out of politics altogether for a little while, but I feel strongly that I can’t sit on the sidelines any more and watch our country fail.
I’ve come to the conclusion that Reform UK is the only party that is prepared to be different and to tackle the most pressing issues. I’ve been impressed with their recent policy announcements and the clarity they have on a range of issues, and that’s why I’m joining today.
At least 20 other former Tory MPs have defected to Nigel Farage’s party, not including the Reform UK MPs Lee Anderson (who defected in the last parliament from the Tories) and Danny Kruger (who switched three months ago).
In a post on social media, Anderson said that getting Bradley to defect was “a major coup for us as he has left an extremely well paid job to join our team”.
The commentator Sam Freedman has a different take on Bluesky.
Former Tory MP Ben Bradley has now defected to Reform. They really are taking all the worst people from the Boris era.
Treatment hospital waiting list figures rise slightly, NHS England figures show
The waiting list for routine hospital treatment in England has risen slightly, PA Media reports. PA says:
An estimated 7.40 million treatments were waiting to be carried out at the end of October, up from 7.39 million at the end of September, NHS figures show.
The number of patients waiting for treatment is broadly unchanged at 6.24 million.
The list hit a record high in September 2023, with 7.77 million treatments and 6.50 million patients.
Minister to answer Commons urgent question on Trump's national security strategy
At 10.30am a Cabinet Office minister will respond to an urgent question on Donald Trump’s national security strategy. It has been tabled by Matt Western, the Labour MP who chairs parliament’s joint committee on national security strategy.
MPs should sit if necessary at weekend to get employment rights bill passed before Christmas, union leader says
The Fire Brigades Union is saying Keir Starmer should if necessary force MPs to sit over the weekend to ensure that the employment rights bill will become law before Christmas.
The Commons is due to rise a week today for the Christmas recess, but the employment rights bill cannot become law until the dispute between the elected house and the Lords is resolved. (See 8.42am.) Commenting on the vote in the Lords last night, Steve Wright, the FBU general secretary, said:
For 14 years, the Tories hammered the living standards of working people. They are now using the unelected Lords to continue that policy.
This is a disgraceful attempt to subvert democracy. The employment rights bill was a clear manifesto commitment, and the electorate has backed it.
The Labour government cannot allow the Tories to use their inbuilt majority in the Lords to deny workers protection against unfair dismissal and zero-hour contracts.
There must be no more watering-down of the bill. Keir Starmer must prioritise the urgent delivery of the legislation - and get it passed before the Christmas recess. If that means MPs must sit on a Saturday, as the Commons did during Brexit, then so be it.
Updated
Tory MP inadvertently allowed APPG on defence technology to be part funded by Israeli government, standards watchdog says
Neil Shastri-Hurst, a Conservative MP, has been ordered to apologise after an investigation found that he allowed an all-party parliamentary group (APPG) that he chairs to receive funding from a foreign government.
In a report, the Commons standards committee says that Shastri-Hurst failed to carry out proper due diligence checks in his capacity as chair of the APPG for defence technology.
It says:
As the registered contact of the APPG, Dr Shastri-Hurst failed to ensure that adequate due diligence checks were made on RUK Advanced Systems Ltd, which in turn enabled a foreign government, in this case the Government of Israel, to act as an indirect, eventual funder of the secretariat.
APPGs often receive funding from organisations linked to the subject area they cover, and the APPG for defence technology invited groups to contribute either as tier 1 partners, paying £1,499, or tier 2 partners, paying £5,000. In return, partners received either limited or enhanced access to its events.
RUK Advanced Systems Ltd was a tier 1 partner.
Shastri-Hurst referred himself to the parliamentary commissioner for standards after Declassified UK revealed that RUK Advanced Systems Ltd is part of a defence firm owned by the Israeli government.
The committee says Shastri-Hurst should issue a written apology for breaking the rules.
The committee also says the Commons authorities should consider “taking advice from external advisors with professional expertise in due diligence on how best to advise APPGs on conducting due diligence, perhaps by seeking to establish clear principles and a checklist which chairs and registered contacts might use to inform their actions as they undertake this responsibility”.
Next year the committee is going to carry out its own review of the rules governing APPGs to see if they need clarifiying.
Homelessness minister promises to end use of B&Bs as emergency housing
Alison McGovern, the homelessness minister, has pledged to end the use of bed and breakfasts as emergency housing, even as new figures show that the country’s homelessness problem has worsened since Labour came into government. McGovern was speaking to the Guardian to promote the homelessness strategy being announced today. Kiran Stacey and Jessica Murray have the story.
Peers told they risk ‘constitutional crisis’ after surprise vote to continue blocking employment rights bill
Good morning. Yesterday Keir Starmer announced the creation of 25 Labour new peers. About an hour or so later, the government lost an important vote on the employment rights bill – by 24 votes.
The defeat was unexpected, because the government had already announced a significant U-turn on the bill, as part of a compromise deal negotiated with business and unions intended to ensure the legislation clears the Lords quickly. What is going to happen next is not yet clear.
Here is the PA Media story on the Lords vote.
Flagship workers’ rights reforms face a further holdup as peers inflicted a defeat over a late change linked to the government concession on unfair dismissal that has been branded “a job destroyer”.
The latest setback means a continuation of the parliamentary tussle over the employment rights bill known as “ping-pong”, when legislation is batted between the Commons and Lords until agreement is reached.
In an attempt to end the stand-off, the government recently ditched its election pledge to give employees day-one protection against unfair dismissal and instead accepted a six-month qualifying period for the workplace safeguard, demanded by the upper chamber.
However, alongside this it introduced at the 11th hour a measure to scrap the compensation caps for unfair dismissal, which are currently the lower of 52 weeks’ pay or £118,223.
The government insists this formed part of the compromise agreement reached with business groups and trade unions although this is disputed.
With the clock ticking down to the Christmas recess, peers backed by 244 votes to 220, majority 24, a Tory call to force a review of the existing compensation limits, which ministers are seeking to remove.
The fresh defeat has sparked an angry response from the unions, with unelected members accused of “defying the will of the British public” and told to “move out the way”.
But speaking in the Lords, Tory shadow business minister Lord Sharpe of Epsom said: “The constitutional implications of introducing major new policy at ping-pong are profound.”
He added: “This is not obstruction. It is the bare minimum that a competent administration should undertake.”
Speaking after the vote, Paul Nowak, the general secretary of the TUC, said:
Continuing to vote down the employment rights bill – a clear manifesto commitment – is undemocratic. This bill has been debated and scrutinised for months. Tory Peers are actively defying the will of the British public and their own supporters who overwhelmingly support measures in this bill.
Mike Clancy, general secretary of the Prospect union, went further. He said:
The behaviour of the House of Lords can no longer be seen as constructive scrutiny and increasingly looks like cynical wrecking tactics that risk a constitutional crisis if they continue.
Further delay is in nobody’s interests and only prolongs uncertainty, the bill must pass before Christmas including lifting the caps on compensation.
The Lords vote came as Starmer was also facing criticism over the fact that he has now appointed almost 100 new peers to the Lords, an institution he once suggested he would abolish.
Here is the agenda for the day.
9.30am: NHS England publishes its monthly performance figures.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Norfolk promoting government policy on buses.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
2pm: Starmer holds a further video call with ‘coalition of the willing’ leaders, after a call yesterday with Donald Trump involved “pretty strong words”, according to the president.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
