General Election 2024: Five things the main parties aren’t talking about this election

Published

1 year ago

July 1, 2024

admin

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

UK

Child sexual exploitation victims ‘not in scope’ of violence against women and girls strategy

Published

13 hours ago

August 15, 2025

admin

Child sexual exploitation victims 'not in scope' of violence against women and girls strategy

Victims of child sexual exploitation are “not explicitly within the scope” of the Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) strategy being drafted by the government, Sky News can reveal.

Child Sexual Abuse and Exploitation (CSEA) is a form of child abuse, described by police as a “critical threat” to women and girls.

It includes crimes such as grooming, and can involve both physical contact, such as rape, or non-physical – like forcing children to look at sexual images.

Sky News has been shown an internal Home Office document presented to various stakeholders in the sector.

It’s titled “Scope of the Strategy… Our draft definition of VAWG”, and says that while it recognises “links” between VAWG and child sexual exploitation, it is not “explicitly within the scope of the strategy”.

“VAWG is Violence Against Women and Girls. If you take child sexual abuse out of it, where are the girls?” Poppy Eyre told Sky News.

Poppy was sexually abused and raped by her grandfather when she was four.

It wasn’t until she was 11, after a PHSE lesson on abuse at school, that she understood the enormity of what had happened.

“I remember very vividly when the police came round and told me… this is what we’re charging him with,” said Poppy.

“We’re charging him with sexual abuse and rape. And I remember being like, I had no idea that’s what it was, but I know that’s really bad.”

Poppy’s grandfather was convicted and died in prison.

She questions how authorities would police crime if child sexual abuse is excluded from an umbrella strategy to tackle violence against women and girls.

“Are they holding child sexual abuse at the same level of importance as they are with violence against women? You’d hope so, but potentially not, because it doesn’t need to be in the figures”, she said.

The government has pledged to halve VAWG within a decade, by 2035.

“If the government are measuring themselves against halving violence against women and girls – if they’re not looking at the scale of child sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation within that – that will mean we are failing many young victims of abuse,” said Andrea Simon, director of campaign group End Violence Against Women.

The Centre of Expertise on Child Sexual Abuse, which is funded by the Home Office, estimates 500,000 children in England and Wales are sexually abused every year.

‘Danger’ of having separate plan

Rape Crisis told Sky News that “for any strategy to be effective” it “must include all forms of gender-based violence against all women and girls”, suggesting there is a “danger” in having a separate plan for child sexual abuse.

Its chief executive, Ciara Bergman, said it could create a “problematic and potentially very unhelpful” distinction between victims of domestic abuse, expected to be covered by the strategy, and child sexual abuse.

“Some perpetrators of domestic abuse also sexually abuse their children,” she told Sky News.

The government insists the strategy will include action to tackle child sexual abuse, but says it also plans to create a distinctive programme to address its specific crimes.

“Sexual abuse is violence against a child,” said Poppy’s mother, Miranda Eyre, who now works as a counsellor specialising in trauma.

“It is violence against girls… and you can’t separate it out,” she said. “I’m speechless to be honest… it does make me quite angry.”

A Home Office spokesperson told Sky News it is “working tirelessly to tackle the scourges of violence against women and girls and child sexual abuse”.

“These issues are complex and run deep within the fabric of society,” they added.

“The government wholly recognises that they overlap. But it also recognises that concerted action is needed to tackle child sexual abuse which is why we have set out a range of actions… and why we are launching a national inquiry into grooming gangs.”

UK

King to warn that sacrifices of VJ Day veterans should ‘never be forgotten’

Published

13 hours ago

August 15, 2025

admin

King to warn that sacrifices of VJ Day veterans should 'never be forgotten'

The King will issue a warning that the sacrifices of the VJ Day veterans should “never be forgotten” as they “gave us more than freedom; they left us the example of how it can and must be protected”.

In an audio message, due to be released on Friday morning to mark 80 years since the end of the Second World War in the Far East, King Charles will describe how the heroic actions of those sent to fight there and the brutal treatment of civilians “reminds us that war’s true cost extends beyond battlefields, touching every aspect of life”.

In what could be interpreted as him alluding to current world events and conflicts, he will emphasise the importance of international collaboration, saying that victory in 1945 demonstrated that “in times of war and in times of peace, the greatest weapons of all are not the arms you bear but the arms you link”.

The six-minute audio message to the Nation, Realms and Commonwealth to mark VJ Day, echoes the audio broadcast made by his grandfather, King George VI, which the King will reference.

He recorded it in the Morning Room at Clarence House earlier this month.

Victory over Japan (VJ Day) was declared on 15 August 1945, following Imperial Japan’s surrender to Allied Forces.

With Victory in Europe (VE Day) declared in May 1945, some have felt that historically VJ Day has been overlooked, undervaluing the sacrifices of those who continued to fight on for another three months.

In his message, the King will say that the service and sacrifice of those who fought and died in the Pacific and Far East “shall never be forgotten”.

He will also refer to the experience endured by prisoners of war and to the innocent civilians of occupied lands in the region.

King Charles and Queen Camilla will also publicly mark the anniversary by attending a national service of remembrance at the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire.

The service, run in partnership with the Royal British Legion, will be attended by Burma Star recipients, a veteran of the British Indian Army and those involved in the Battles of Kohima and Imphal.

Prisoners of war held across the region and veterans stationed in the UK or Commonwealth countries who contributed to the war effort will also attend. A two-minute national silence will be held at midday.

UK

British veteran, 100, recalls witnessing Japan’s Second World War surrender on USS Missouri

Published

13 hours ago

August 15, 2025

admin

British veteran, 100, recalls witnessing Japan's Second World War surrender on USS Missouri

A British veteran has spoken about how he witnessed Japan’s wartime surrender up close as a 20-year-old sailor.

Reg Draper was off Japan’s coast on the HMS Duke of York when the captain announced the war was ending.

Recalling that moment – 80 years ago today – he said cheers went up from the battleship’s crew.

Mr Draper saw the Japanese sign the agreement on USS Missouri when he went on board to help his friend, who was the ship’s photographer.

“All the ships mustered in Tokyo Bay with the USS Missouri, which was the American ship, and it was on the Missouri where they signed the peace treaty,” the 100-year-old recalled.

“Then we all came back down to Australia and we went and celebrated – we went down to Tasmania and everybody had four days leave in Hobart.

“Everybody wanted to take us to their home and there were a couple of dances in the dance hall.”

Mr Draper, who grew up in Leeds, was a stores assistant on the Duke of York after volunteering on his 18th birthday.

His duties included rationing out the rum so all the sailors could get their 11am hit. He said senior crew got theirs neat while everyone else had theirs watered down.

He also recalled being clattered by Prince Philip after the Queen’s future husband, who was on a destroyer escorting his ship, came aboard.

“We used to have deck hockey on the quarter deck and it was murder playing deck hockey,” said Mr Draper.

“He [Philip] knocked me over once and then the next time he came round he hit me, there’s still a mark there, he gave me a clout with his hockey stick.

“He came to see me just to see how I was. They just put a stitch in and it was alright.”

The pair met again in 1972 when Mr Draper was training sea cadets for the Duke of Edinburgh awards.

He said Philip noticed his medals and recalled escorting the ship – but didn’t mention the hockey game.

Mr Draper’s time on the Duke of York included Arctic convoys to deliver supplies to Russia and sailing to Sydney, Australia, in 1945 before joining the East Indies Fleet.

“We started going up to the islands, kicking the Japanese out of the islands as we went,” he recalled.

Japan surrendered after the US dropped two nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, on 6 and 9 August.

Mr Draper turned 21 on the trip back to Europe and said 2,000 people were on board as they had picked up prisoners of war.

He went on to become an insurance salesman and said he’s planning to watch today’s 80th anniversary commemorations from his home in Elton, Cheshire.

The King released an audio message in which he said the sacrifices of VJ Day veterans should “never be forgotten”.

He described how the heroic actions of those sent to fight in the Far East, as well as the brutal treatment of civilians, “reminds us that war’s true cost extends beyond battlefields, touching every aspect of life”.