General Election 2024: Five things the main parties aren’t talking about this election
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) says there’s a conspiracy of silence this election – that all of the major political parties aren’t being honest enough about their fiscal plans this election.
And they have a point. Most obviously (and this is the main thing the IFS is complaining about) none of the major manifestos – from Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative parties – have been clear about how they will fill an impending black hole in the government’s spending plans.
No need to go into all the gritty details, but the overarching point is that all government spending plans include some broad assumptions about how much spending (and for that matter, taxes and economic growth) will grow in the coming years. Economists call this the “baseline”.
But there’s a problem with this baseline: it assumes quite a slow increase in overall government spending in the next four years, an average of about 1 per cent a year after accounting for inflation. Which doesn’t sound too bad except that we all know from experience that NHS spending always grows more quickly than that, and that 1 per cent needs to accommodate all sorts of other promises, like increasing schools and defence spending and so on.
NHS spending grows more quickly than the ‘baseline’
If all those bits of government are going to consume quite a lot of that extra money (far more than a 1 per cent increase, certainly) then other bits of government won’t get as much. In fact, the IFS reckons those other bits of government – from the Home Office to the legal system – will face annual cuts of 3.5 per cent. In other words, it’s austerity all over again.
But here’s the genius thing (for the politicians, at least). While they have to set a baseline, to make all their other sums add up, the dysfunctional nature of the way government sets its spending budgets means it only has to fill in the small print about which department gets what when it does a spending review. And that spending review isn’t due until after the election.
The upshot is all the parties can pretend they’ve signed up to the baseline even when it’s patently obvious that more money will be needed for those unprotected departments (or else it’s a return to austerity).
So yes, the IFS is right: the numbers in each manifesto, including Labour’s, are massively overshadowed by this other bigger conspiracy of silence.
But I would argue that actually the conspiracy of silence goes even deeper. Because it’s not just fiscal baselines we’re not talking about enough. Consider five other issues none of the major parties is confronting (when I say major parties, in this case I’m talking about the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem manifestos – to some extent the Green and Reform manifestos are somewhat less guilty of these particular sins, even if they commit others).
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Taxes going up
First, for all their promises not to raise any of the major tax rates (something Labour, the Conservatives and Lib Dems have all committed to) the reality is taxes are going up. We will all be paying more in taxes by the end of the parliament compared with today.
Indeed, we’ll all be paying more income tax. Except that we’ll be paying more of it because we’ll be paying tax on more of our income – that’s the inexorable logic of freezing the thresholds at which you start paying certain rates of tax (which is what this government has done – and none of the other parties say they’ll reverse).
Second, the main parties might say they believe in different things, but they all seem to believe in one particular offbeat religion: the magic tax avoidance money tree. All three of these manifestos assume they will make enormous sums – more, actually, than from any single other money-raising measure – from tightening up tax avoidance rules.
While it’s perfectly plausible that you could raise at least some money from clamping down on tax avoidance, it’s hardly a slam-dunk. That this is the centrepiece of each party’s money-raising efforts says a lot. And, another thing that’s often glossed over: raising more money this way will also raise the tax burden.
Should the Bank of England be paying large sums in interest to banks? File pic: AP
Third is another thing all the parties agree on and are desperate not to question: the fiscal rules. The government has a set of rules requiring it to keep borrowing and (more importantly given where the numbers are right now) total debt down to a certain level.
But here’s the thing. These rules are not god-given. They are not necessarily even all that good. The debt rule is utterly gameable. It hasn’t stopped the Conservatives raising the national debt to the highest level in decades. And it’s not altogether clear the particular measure of debt being used (net debt excluding Bank of England interventions) is even the right one.
Which raises another micro-conspiracy. Of all the parties at this election, the only one talking about whether the Bank of England should really be paying large sums in interest to banks as it winds up its quantitative easing programme is the Reform Party. This policy, first posited by a left-wing thinktank (the New Economics Foundation) is something many economists are discussing. It’s something the Labour Party will quite plausibly carry out to raise some extra money if it gets elected. But no one wants to discuss it. Odd.
Brexit impact
Anyway, the fourth issue everyone seems to have agreed not to discuss is, you’ve guessed it, Brexit. While the 2019 election was all about Brexit, this one, by contrast, has barely featured the B word. Perhaps you’re relieved. For a lot of people we’ve talked so much about Brexit over the past decade or so that, frankly, we need a bit of a break. That’s certainly what the main parties seem to have concluded.
But while the impact of leaving the European Union is often overstated (no, it’s not responsible for every one of our economic problems) it’s far from irrelevant to our economic plight. And where we go with our economic neighbours is a non-trivial issue in the future.
Anyway, this brings us to the fifth and final thing no one is talking about. The fact that pretty much all the guff spouted on the campaign trail is completely dwarfed by bigger international issues they seem reluctant or ill-equipped to discuss. Take the example of China and electric cars.
Brexit has barely featured in the election. File pic: Victoria Jones/PA
Just recently, both the US and European Union have announced large tariffs on the import of Chinese EVs. Now, in America’s case those tariffs are primarily performative (the country imports only a tiny quantity of Chinese EVs). But in Europe‘s case Chinese EVs are a very substantial part of the market – same for the UK.
Raising the question: what is the UK going to do? You could make a strong case for saying Britain should be emulating the EU and US, in an effort to protect the domestic car market. After all, failing to impose tariffs will mean this country will have a tidal wave of cars coming from China (especially since they can no longer go to the rest of the continent without facing tariffs) which will make it even harder for domestic carmakers to compete. And they’re already struggling to compete.
By the same token, imposing tariffs will mean the cost of those cheap Chinese-made cars (think: MGs, most Teslas and all those newfangled BYDs and so on) will go up. A lot. Is this really the right moment to impose those extra costs on consumers.
In short, this is quite a big issue. Yet it hasn’t come up as a big issue in this campaign. Which is madness. But then you could say the same thing about, say, the broader race for minerals, about net zero policy more widely and about how we’re going to go about tightening up sanctions on Russia to make them more effective.
? Click here to follow The Ian King Business Podcast wherever you get your podcasts ?
Parochial election
Elections are always parochial but given the scale of these big, international issues (and there are many more), this one feels especially parochial.
So in short: yes, there have been lots of gaps. Enormous gaps. The “conspiracy of silence” goes way, way beyond the stuff the IFS has talked about.
But ’twas ever thus.
Read more:
Why the US is imposing 100% tariff on Chinese electric cars
Rapid steps needed for Britain to compete in green revolution
Think back to the last time a political party actually confronted some long-standing issues no one wanted to talk about in their manifesto. I’m talking about the 2017 Conservative manifesto, which pledged to resolve the mess of social care in this country, once and for all.
It sought to confront a big social issue, intergenerational inequality, in so doing ensuring younger people wouldn’t have to subsidise the elderly.
The manifesto was an absolute, abject, electoral disaster. It was largely responsible for Theresa May‘s slide in the polls from a 20 point lead to a hung parliament.
And while most people don’t talk about that manifesto anymore, make no mistake: today’s political strategists won’t forget it in a hurry. Hence why this year’s campaign and this year’s major manifestos are so thin.
Elections are rarely won on policy proposals. But they are sometimes lost on them.
The UK will buy at least 12 F-35 stealth jets that can carry nuclear warheads in the most significant strengthening of its nuclear capability in a generation, the government has said.
Today, Sir Keir Starmer will tell a summit of NATO allies in The Hague that the new squadron will join an alliance mission that can be armed with US nuclear weapons.
The dramatic move will doubtless draw condemnation and concern from Russia and China.
But it comes at a time of growing global insecurity – and as the prime minister and his European and Canadian counterparts scramble to convince Donald Trump they are serious about bolstering their ability to defend Europe, instead of overly relying on the United States.
The US president, a long-standing NATO sceptic, raised questions about whether he would uphold the alliance’s founding Article 5 principle – that an attack on one is an attack on all – before he even arrived in the Dutch city last night.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘There’s numerous definitions of Article 5’
An urgent need to keep Mr Trump on side has prompted NATO allies to agree to increase spending on defence and national resilience to a new target of 5% of GDP by 2035.
As part of this push to rearm, Sir Keir will give the Royal Air Force the ability to carry airborne nuclear warheads for the first time since the 1990s.
“In an era of radical uncertainty we can no longer take peace for granted,” he said.
“These F-35 dual capable aircraft will herald a new era for our world-leading Royal Air Force and deter hostile threats that threaten the UK and our allies.
“The UK’s commitment to NATO is unquestionable, as is the alliance’s contribution to keeping the UK safe and secure, but we must all step up to protect the Euro-Atlantic area for generations to come.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
What is NATO’s 5% defence spending goal?
It was not immediately clear when the F-35 jets would be bought or how much they will cost, but the new squadron will be part of a NATO-led nuclear deterrence mission.
That is in contrast to the UK’s national nuclear deterrence, based on a fleet of four nuclear-armed submarines, though they too are used to defend the whole of the alliance.
Mark Rutte, the head of NATO, applauded the plan – saying: “The UK has declared its nuclear deterrent to NATO for many decades, and I strongly welcome today’s announcement that the UK will now also join NATO’s nuclear mission and procure the F-35A.
“This is yet another robust British contribution to NATO.”
Sir Keir watches a demonstration by troops as he visits the Netherlands marines training base. Pic: AP
Aircraft operated by a small number of NATO countries, including Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands, are cleared to carry US-provided nuclear weapons in a war.
The RAF and the Royal Navy already operate F-35B jets that can fly off Britain’s two aircraft carriers, but they are not equipped to drop nuclear warheads.
The new planes will be the F-35A variant, operated by the air force, that take off from land but can fly further and be armed with nuclear or conventional weapons.
The government said they would all be based together at RAF Marham in Norfolk.
The government has long planned to purchase a total of 138 F-35 aircraft, but has so far only acquired around three dozen – seven years since the first jets entered service.
The decision to purchase 12 of the A-variant does not mean extra aircraft.
It just means a diversification in the fleet – something the RAF has long been pushing for – though it’s a decision some in the Royal Navy have long pushed back against, believing it would reduce even further the number of the B-version that operate from their carriers.
Read more:
PM warns of ‘era of radical uncertainty’
Podcast – What is NATO without America?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is the UK preparing for war?
The government described the plan to purchase nuclear-capable aircraft as the “biggest strengthening of the UK’s nuclear posture in a generation”.
Defence Secretary John Healey said a major defence review published earlier in the month highlighted new nuclear risks.
“It recommended a new UK role in our collective defence and deterrence through a NATO-first approach,” he said.
However, the public version of the Strategic Defence Review stopped short of making any specific recommendation.
It merely said “the UK must explore how to support the US and its NATO allies in strengthening extended deterrence across the Euro-Atlantic”.
The F-35 aircraft is made by the US defence giant Lockheed Martin, but the British defence company BAE Systems is also a key contributor.
The order will support 20,000 jobs in the F-35 programme in the UK.
Doctors are using AI software that does not meet minimum standards to record and transcribe patient meetings, according to a Sky News investigation.
NHS bosses have demanded GPs and hospitals stop using artificial intelligence software that could breach data protection rules and put patients at risk.
A warning sent out by NHS England this month came just weeks after the same body wrote to doctors about the benefits of using AI for notetaking – to allow them more time to concentrate on patients – using software known as Ambient Voice Technology, or “AVT”.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting will next week put AI at the heart of the reform plan to save the NHS in the 10-year plan for the health service in England.
But there is growing controversy around software that records, transcribes and summarises patient conversations using AI.
In April, NHS England wrote to doctors to sell the benefits of AVT and set out minimum national standards.
However, in a letter seen by Sky News, NHS bosses wrote to doctors to warn that unapproved software that breached minimum standards could harm patients.
The version seen in the GP demonstration to Sky News complies with all NHS England standards and guidance
The 9 June letter, from the national chief clinical information officer of NHS England, said: “We are now aware of a number of AVT solutions which, despite being non-compliant … are still being widely used in clinical practice.
“Several AVT suppliers are approaching NHS organisations … many of these vendors have not complied with basic NHS governance standards.
“Proceeding with non-compliant solutions risks clinical safety, data protection breaches, financial exposure, and fragmentation of broader NHS digital strategy.”
Sky News has previously revealed the danger of AI “hallucinations”, where the technology makes up answers then lies about them, which could prove dangerous in a healthcare setting.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is ChatGPT reliable despite its ‘hallucinations’?
NHS England sets minimum standards but does not tell NHS trusts and healthcare providers which software providers to use.
Sky News can now reveal there is growing pressure on NHS England and similar bodies to be more proactive.
Dr David Wrigley, deputy chair of the British Medical Association’s GP committee, said: “Undoubtedly, as a GP myself and my 35,000 colleagues, we’ve got responsibilities here – but in such a rapidly developing market when we haven’t got the technical knowledge to look into this.
“We need that help and support from those who can check that the products are safe, check they’re secure, that they’re suitable for use in the consulting room, and NHS England should do that and help and support us.”
Dr Wrigley continued: “We’re absolutely in favour of tech and in favour of taking that forward to help NHS patients, help my colleagues in their surgeries.
“But it’s got to be done in a safe and secure way because otherwise we could have a free for all – and then data could be lost, it could be leaking out, and that just isn’t acceptable.
“So we are not dinosaurs, we’re very pro-AI, but it has to be a safe, secure way.”
The head of the NHS Confederation says the letter is ‘a really significant moment’
The spectre of dozens of little-known but ambitious AI companies lobbying hospitals and surgeries to get their listening products installed worries some healthcare professionals.
There are huge profits to be made in this technological arms race, but the question being asked is whether hundreds of different NHS organisations can really be expected to sift out the sharks.
Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, said the letter was “a really significant moment”.
He said it was right for the NHS to experiment, but that it needed to be clearer what technology does and does not work safely.
“My own view is that the government should help in terms of the procurement decisions that trusts make and should advise on which AI systems – as we do with other forms of technology that we use in medicine – which ones are safe,” Mr Taylor said.
“We’ll need [government] to do a bit more to guide the NHS in the best way to use this.”
When pressed whether in the short term that actually makes it sound like it could be quite dangerous, Mr Taylor replied: “What you’ve seen with ambient voice technology is that kind of ‘let a thousand flowers bloom’ approach has got its limits.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Godfather of AI warns of its dangers
Earlier this year, the health secretary appeared to suggest unapproved technology was being used – but celebrated it as a sign doctors were enthusiastic for change.
Mr Streeting said: “I’ve heard anecdotally down the pub, genuinely down the pub, that some clinicians are getting ahead of the game and are already using ambient AI to kind of record notes and things, even where their practice or their trust haven’t yet caught up with them.
“Now, lots of issues there – not encouraging it – but it does tell me that contrary to this, ‘Oh, people don’t want to change, staff are very happy and they are really resistant to change’, it’s the opposite. People are crying out for this stuff.”
Read more from Sky News:
National investigation launched into maternity services
Every baby in the UK to receive DNA testing
GP Anil Mehta says AI software helps cut paperwork and patients are ‘extremely reassured’
Doctors who use AI that complies with national standards already say there are big benefits.
Anil Mehta, a doctor in the health secretary’s Ilford constituency, told Sky News he backed his MP’s drive for more AI technology in healthcare.
Dr Mehta demonstrated the version of Ambient Voice Technology that he uses.
This software, Accurx Scribe, has been developed and deployed in line with all current NHS England requirements for AVT, and there is no suggestion this product breaches any rules, standards or guidance.
Indeed, the company which developed it meets weekly with NHS England on creating a standardised approach to scale the benefits across the NHS.
“I spend 30% of my week doing paperwork,” Dr Mehta said.
“So I think once I’ve explained all of those features of what we’re doing, patients are extremely reassured. And I haven’t faced anybody that’s not wanted to have me do this.
He added: “(I) think that consultation with your doctor is extremely confidential, so that’s not changed at all.
“That remains confidential – so whether it’s a vulnerable adult, a vulnerable child, teenager, young child with a parent, I think the concept of that confidentiality remains.”
An NHS spokesperson said: “Ambient Voice Technology has the potential to transform care and improve efficiency and in April, the NHS issued guidance to support its use in a safe and secure way.
“We are working with NHS organisations and suppliers to ensure that all Ambient Voice Technology products used across the health service continue to be compliant with NHS standards on clinical safety and data security.”
Another heatwave could be on the way this weekend, forecasters say.
Temperatures could reach 30C, but some showers are expected before then amid more changeable weather.
Some parts of the UK will experience highs of 29C on Saturday, with the potential for 30C on Sunday and 31C on Monday, according to the Met Office.
Last Saturday was the hottest day of the year so far, with a provisional temperature of 33.2C recorded in Charlwood, Surrey.
The Met Office confirmed “many places” in England and “one or two areas” in Wales, including Cardiff, entered a heatwave last Friday.
A heatwave is recorded when an area reaches a certain temperature – the level of which varies across the UK – for three consecutive days.
Music fans can expect a mixture of sunshine and rain at this week’s Glastonbury Festival, where more than 200,000 people are expected to attend.
Some parts of the UK entered a heatwave last week. Pic: PA
‘Risk of showers and thunderstorms’
Oli Claydon, from the Met Office, said Wednesday would be “warmer” with “an increasing risk of showers and thunderstorms”.
He said temperatures would reach a maximum of 27C on Thursday, with potential for heavy showers in the east and more persistent rain in the northwest of Scotland into the evening.
“Friday will see a maximum of 27C again as the high, the showers will clear away to the northeast, with local drizzle in parts of the South West and Wales through the day,” Mr Claydon added.
The South East of England is expected to experience the highest temperatures, potentially reaching 29C on Saturday and 30C on Sunday.
Temperatures could reach up to 31C on Monday, but there was lower certainty around that, Mr Claydon added.
Mr Claydon said it was possible the South East of England “could be looking at a short-lived localised heatwave”.
“When we had the warm spell last week it was much more widespread, we’re not likely to see that,” he added.
Read more from Sky News:
Trump swears on camera
‘Kardashian of Cheshire’ admits handbag scam
So far, this month’s average daytime temperature is 19.2C, slightly above the June average of 17.68C.
But the Met Office said that temperatures were expected to fall next week.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike