Rwanda bill: Keir Starmer attacks Tory ‘farce’ – as Rishi Sunak insists the small boats plan ‘will work’

Published

1 year ago

January 17, 2024

admin

Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has attacked the “farce” playing out in the Conservative Party over the government’s Rwanda bill, claiming Rishi Sunak’s plan had been “brutally exposed” by his own MPs.

Ministers insist the scheme to deport asylum seekers who arrive via small boats is “the most robust” immigration legislation ever presented to the Commons, and will revive the plan after it was ruled unlawful by the Supreme Court late last year.

But right-wing factions within the Tories want it to go even further – especially on limiting appeals and disapplying international law – and 60 MPs rebelled against the government on Tuesday night to support toughening up the bill.

Follow live: Starmer drops expletive in criticism of Rwanda plan

Further amendments are being debated today, with more rebellions on the cards for later – including threats from some senior Tories that they could vote down the bill in its entirety if ministers don’t accept their proposals.

But Mr Sunak would face further rebellion from the centrist wing of his party if he conceded to the right-wing demands.

‘Bald men scrapping over a single broken comb’

Speaking at Prime Minister’s Questions (PMQs) shortly before the second day of debate on the legislation began, Sir Keir compared the Conservatives to “hundreds of bald men scrapping over a single broken comb”.

The Labour leader said the “open revolt” within the Tories against “his policy, each other and reality” proved the “gimmick” of the Rwanda bill was set to fail.

“It’s such utterly pathetic nonsense,” he said, adding: “If the prime minister can’t even persuade his own MPs it is worth supporting him… why on earth should anyone else think differently?”

But Mr Sunak stood by his new legislation, despite the rebellions and the criticism, telling the Commons: “I have absolute conviction that the plan we have in place will work, absolute conviction, because I think it is important that we grip this problem.”

He said it was “important that we have a working deterrent” to put asylum seekers off from making the dangerous journey, and claimed it had legal backing too.

“Four eminent KCs have said it is undoubtedly the most robust piece of immigration legislation this parliament has seen,” said the prime minister.

“And a former Supreme Court justice has been clear that the bill works too.”

Rebels seeking Downing Street talks

His appearance at PMQs was Mr Sunak’s last chance to publicly appeal to his backbenchers to get behind the government’s plans before the second day of debate began.

However, one of the rebels, former education minister Jonathan Gullis, told Sky News earlier that he and his allies were keen to “get into 10 Downing Street today” to “talk it out and find a way forward so we can avoid colleagues choosing to either abstain or go in the opposite lobby”.

The government has offered limited concessions to the rebels, including increasing the number of judges to take on deportation appeals, and hinting they could change the civil service code to ensure ministers’ decisions over disapplying international human rights law would be followed.

But further amendments – specifically around injunctions by international courts grounding flights to Rwanda – are expected today, and more rebellions could take place.

Some Tory backbenchers have even said they are prepared to vote down the bill when it is put to parliament later this evening, including former immigration minister Robert Jenrick, Mr Gullis and ex-housing secretary Simon Clarke.

But it will take around 30 Conservatives to vote against it for the bill to fall.

After six hours of debate on Tuesday, 60 Conservative MPs voted in defiance of the government to back amendments limiting appeals against deportation.

A second amendment around the same issue, put forward by Mr Jenrick, also secured the support of 58 Tories.

Two deputy chairmen of the Tory party and one ministerial aide quit their posts in order to back the rebels.

However, the majority of MPs from all parties voted against the proposals, meaning they were not added to the bill.

Meanwhile, at the World Economic Forum, the president of Rwanda has cast doubt on the future of the scheme.

Asked by Sky News’s Ed Conway if the deal between the two countries – costing the British government £240m so far – was working, Paul Kagame said it was a matter for the UK.

And asked if Rwanda was a safe country for refugees, he said again: “Ask the UK – it’s the UK’s problem.”

Speaking to the Guardian, however, Mr Kagame added: “There are limits for how long this can drag on.

“The money is going to be used on those people who will come. If they don’t come we can return the money.”

Politics

What is a wealth tax, how would it work in the UK and where else has one?

Published

2 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

What is a wealth tax, how would it work in the UK and where else has one?

The idea of a wealth tax has raised its head – yet again – as the government attempts to balance its books.

Downing Street refused to rule out a wealth tax after former Labour leader Lord Kinnock told Sky News he thinks the government should introduce one.

Sir Keir Starmer’s spokesman said: “The prime minister has repeatedly said those with the broadest shoulders should carry the largest burden.”

While there has never been a wealth tax in the UK, the notion was raised under Rishi Sunak after the COVID years – and rejected – and both Harold Wilson’s and James Callaghan’s Labour governments in the 1970s seriously considered implementing one.

Sky News looks at what a wealth tax is, how it could work in the UK, and which countries already have one.

What is a wealth tax?

A wealth tax is aimed at reducing economic inequality to redistribute wealth and to raise revenue.

It is a direct levy on all, or most of, an individual’s, household’s or business’s total net wealth, rather than their income.

The tax typically includes the total market value of assets, including savings, investments, property and other forms of wealth – minus a person’s debts.

Unlike capital gains tax, which is paid when an asset is sold at a profit, a wealth tax is normally an annual charge based on the value of assets owned, even if they are not sold.

A one-off wealth tax, often used after major crises, could also be an option to raise a substantial amount of revenue in one go.

How could it work in the UK?

Advocates of a UK wealth tax, including Lord Kinnock, have proposed an annual 2% tax on wealth above £10m.

Wealth tax campaign group Tax Justice UK has calculated this would affect about 20,000 people – fewer than 0.04% of the population – and raise £24bn a year.

Because of how few people would pay it, Tax Justice says that would make it easy for HMRC to collect the tax.

The group proposes people self-declare asset values, backed up by a compliance team at HMRC who could have a register of assets.

Which countries have or have had a wealth tax?

In 1990, 12 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries had a net wealth tax, but just four have one now: Colombia, Norway, Spain and Switzerland.

France and Italy levy wealth taxes on selected assets.

Colombia

Since 2023, residents in the South American country are subject to tax on their worldwide wealth, but can exclude the value of their household up to 509m pesos (£92,500).

The tax is progressive, ranging from a 0.5% rate to 1.5% for the most wealthy until next year, then 1% for the wealthiest from 2027.

Norway

There is a 0.525% municipal wealth tax for individuals with net wealth exceeding 1.7m kroner (about £125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses.

Norway also has a state wealth tax of 0.475% based on assets exceeding a net capital tax basis of 1.7m kroner (£125,000) or 3.52m kroner (£256,000) for spouses, and 0.575% for net wealth in excess of 20.7m kroner (£1.5m).

The maximum combined wealth tax rate is 1.1%.

The Norwegian Labour coalition government also increased dividend tax to 20% in 2023, and with the wealth tax, it prompted about 80 affluent business owners, with an estimated net worth of £40bn, to leave Norway.

Spain

Residents in Spain have to pay a progressive wealth tax on worldwide assets, with a €700,000 (£600,000) tax free allowance per person in most areas and homes up to €300,000 (£250,000) tax exempt.

The progressive rate goes from 0.2% for taxable income for assets of €167,129 (£144,000) up to 3.5% for taxable income of €10.6m (£9.146m) and above.

It has been reported that more than 12,000 multimillionaires have left Spain since the government introduced the higher levy at the end of 2022.

Switzerland

All of the country’s cantons (districts) have a net wealth tax based on a person’s taxable net worth – different to total net worth.

It takes into account the balance of an individual’s worldwide gross assets, including bank account balances, bonds, shares, life insurances, cars, boats, properties, paintings, jewellery – minus debts.

Switzerland also works on a progressive rate, ranging from 0.3% to 0.5%, with a relatively low starting point at which people are taxed on their wealth, such as 50,000 CHF (£46,200) in several cantons.

Politics

Jingye and Whitehall officials hold talks over British Steel future

Published

5 hours ago

July 9, 2025

admin

Jingye and Whitehall officials hold talks over British Steel future

The Chinese owner of British Steel has held fresh talks with government officials in a bid to break the impasse over ministers’ determination not to compensate it for seizing control of the company.

Sky News has learnt that executives from Jingye Group met senior civil servants from the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) late last week to discuss ways to resolve the standoff.

Whitehall sources said the talks had been cordial, but that no meaningful progress had been made towards a resolution.

Money blog: €1 home goes on sale – but there are T&Cs

Jingye wants the government to agree to pay it hundreds of millions of pounds for taking control of British Steel in April – a move triggered by the Chinese group’s preparations for the permanent closure of its blast furnaces in Scunthorpe.

Such a move would have cost thousands of jobs and ended Britain’s centuries-old ability to produce virgin steel.

Jingye had been in talks for months to seek £1bn in state aid to facilitate the Scunthorpe plant’s transition to greener steelmaking, but was offered just half that sum by ministers.

British Steel has not yet been formally nationalised, although that remains a probable outcome.

Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, has previously dismissed the idea of compensating Jingye, saying British Steel’s equity was essentially worthless.

Last month, he met his Chinese counterpart, where the issue of British Steel was discussed between the two governments in person for the first time.

Jingye has hired the leading City law firm Linklaters to explore the recovery of hundreds of millions of pounds it invested in the Scunthorpe-based company before the government seized control of it.

News of last week’s meeting comes as British steelmakers face an anxious wait to learn whether their exports to the US face swingeing tariffs as part of US President Donald Trump’s trade war.

Sky News’s economics and data editor, Ed Conway, revealed this week that the UK would miss a White House-imposed deadline to agree a trade deal on steel and aluminium this week.

Jingye declined to comment, while a spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade said: “We acted quickly to ensure the continued operations of the blast furnaces but recognise that securing British Steel’s long-term future requires private sector investment.

“We have not nationalised British Steel and are working closely with Jingye on options for the future, and we will continue work on determining the best long-term sustainable future for the site.”