Connect with us

Published

on

The Labour manifesto never did add up.

On the one hand, Keir Starmer vowed there would be “no return to austerity” under his government, while also insisting he had “no plans” to raise taxes beyond an £8bn raid on private equity, oil and gas companies, private school fees and non-doms to pay for more teachers and NHS appointments.

Follow live: All the latest on budget day

In reality, whoever won the election faced tens of billions of pounds in tough choices over tax and spending. But instead of levelling with us, the two main parties embarked in a “conspiracy of silence” in order to win votes.

Today, the truth will out, in a budget which will define Sir Keir Starmer’s first term in a way his manifesto did not.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What to expect from the budget

There will be huge tax rises and there will be changes in the fiscal rules to allow the chancellor to borrow more to invest in Britain’s crumbling infrastructure.

And we will finally find out which “working people” are the ones Sir Keir Starmer wants to protect as small and big businesses, property owners, shareholders – and perhaps “Middle England” too – braces itself for tax rises, and the government braces itself for the fall-out.

The prime minister set the hare running on who’s in the firing line for tax rises last week at the Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Samoa when he told me “working people” were those who “go out and earn their living, usually paid in a sort of monthly cheque” but they did not have the ability to “write a cheque to get out of difficulties”.

He told me explicitly that “working people” who also owned assets, such as property or shares, did not fit his definition.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sky News questions Starmer on tax rises

So business owners, property owners and Middle England do have some cause for alarm.

The pledge to “not increase national insurance, the basic, higher, or additional rates of income tax, or VAT” has been tweaked in recent weeks to a promise to “protect the payslips of working people”.

Employers are expecting an increase in national insurance contributions they must pay on wages – many will argue this is a flagrant breach of a manifesto pledge.

In another blow to employers, but a win for those struggling on low wages, Labour have also announced a 6.7% increase in the National Living Wage for over three million workers next year, amounting to a pay boost worth £1,400-a-year for an eligible full-time worker.

Is this the moment the manifesto is revealed as a sham? Labour insiders insist not and point, again, to the “£22bn black hole” in the current financial year they discovered when their took office – and which ratchets up to a £40bn gap in the public finances over the course of the parliament – that they now have to plug.

Politically, they hope to blame the big tax rises and borrowing on the economic inheritance left to them by the Tories and buy some space with voters.

As one senior government figure put it to me: “The scale of the economic inheritance is bigger than thought and it has blown a political and economic hole in our first few months.”

This will be a message Rachel Reeves will want to land at the despatch box on Wednesday.

But a public disillusioned with politicians might not see it like that as they watch a Labour chancellor, flanked by a prime minister who promised the opposite in the election, embark on a massive round of tax rises that but months ago they were told were not coming down the tracks.

Ms Reeves is set to deliver the budget from 12.30pm. Pic: Treasury
Image:
Ms Reeves is set to deliver the budget from 12.30pm. Pic: Treasury

Insiders acknowledge this is going to be a tax and spend budget that goes far beyond what we were told to expect when Labour were asking for votes.

But they hope what they can do with this big moment is to take it beyond the winners and losers and frame this first Labour budget in over 14 years as “forging a new settlement” for the people and the country.

To that end, this will be the “fixing the foundations and change” budget: “This is a new economic settlement from a government willing to investment and, in particular, borrow to invest, and that is a change and it will show a path towards long term growth.”

Ed Conway analysis:
Could budget’s ‘jiggery-pokery’ scare investors?

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

Because, as we drill into who is a working person, and who is going to be hit with tax raises in this budget, there will also be a big story about billions of investment in our country’s energy and transport infrastructure, into housing and hospitals and schools.

“If we get it right, on the evening of the budget, we want to be able to show that we protected your pay slip, are fixing the NHS and investing to rebuild Britain,” one senior figure explains. “What’s the alternative? Choice is going to feature very heavily in the chancellor’s speech. We have made our choices and we are asking business and the wealthiest to pay a bit more to grow our economy and protecting working people.”

And this new settlement, when it lands, will be massive. Rachel Reeves intends to change her borrowing rules to allow up to £53bn more in borrowing to be spent on public services and infrastructure.

Read more:
Labour MP punching video ‘shocking’, says Starmer
Budget 2024: What’s likely to be in it – and what isn’t?

Trailing the decision at the International Monetary Fund summit in Washington last week, the chancellor said she was making the change in order to take opportunities for the economy “in industries from life sciences to carbon capture, storage and clean energy to AI and technology”, as well as using borrowing to “repair our crumbling schools and hospitals”.

The danger for the chancellor is that what actually comes out the other side is anger over tax rises not flagged in the manifesto, or accusations that the government is being Janus-faced if it claims it’s protecting working people should it also, as speculated, extend the freeze on income tax thresholds beyond the 2028 deadline set by the last government, which would drag millions of workers into higher tax bands (and raise as much as £7bn a year for the government).

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Will there be ‘budget nasties?’

👉 Listen to Politics At Jack And Sam’s on your podcast app👈

How might the middle classes and wealthier voters respond to their incomes being squeezed? And how might businesses respond to being asked to pay billions more in taxes from a government that has been banging on about being pro-business for months?

It is going to be a difficult sell, no doubt. But this government is calculating that short-term pain now will translate into gains in the medium to long term if Reeves can pull it off and kick-start economic growth.

The hope is that come the next Labour manifesto, the pledges on the NHS, economy, better housing and jobs have been met and the public can forgive the tax rises foisted on them to get there.

Starmer talked endlessly about it being a change election and it will be this budget, not his manifesto, that proves the point.

Continue Reading

Business

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry’s row lingers

Published

on

By

Magnum debut suffers a chill as Ben & Jerry's row lingers

Shares in The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) have fallen slightly on debut after the completion of its spin-off from Unilever amid a continuing civil war with one of its best-known brands.

Shares in the Netherlands-based company are trading for the first time following the demerger.

It creates the world’s biggest ice cream company, controlling around one fifth of the global market.

Primary Magnum shares, in Amsterdam, opened at €12.20 – down on the €12.80 reference price set by the EuroNext exchange, though they later settled just above that level, implying a market value of €7.9bn – just below £7bn.

The company is also listed in London and New York.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

Unilever stock was down 3.1% on the FTSE 100 in the wake of the spin off.

More from Money

The demerger allows London-headquartered Unilever to concentrate on its wider stable of consumer brands, including Marmite, Dove soap and Domestos.

The decision to hive off the ice cream division, made in early 2024, gives a greater focus on a market that is tipped to grow by up to 4% each year until 2029.

Ben & Jerry's accounts for a greater volume of group revenue now under TMICC. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Ben & Jerry’s accounts for a greater volume of group revenue now under TMICC. Pic: Reuters

But it has been dogged by a long-running spat with the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s, which now falls under the TMICC umbrella and accounts for 14% of group revenue.

Unilever bought the US brand in 2000, but the relationship has been sour since, despite the creation of an independent board at that time aimed at protecting the brand’s social mission.

The most high-profile spat came in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s took the decision not to sell ice cream in Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories on the grounds that sales would be “inconsistent” with its values.

Unilever responded by selling the business to its licensee in Israel.

A series of rows have followed akin to a tug of war, with Magnum refusing repeated demands by the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s to sell the brand back.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sept: ‘Free Ben & Jerry’s’

Magnum and Unilever argue its mission has strayed beyond what was acceptable back in 2000, with the brand evolving into one-sided advocacy on polarising topics that risk reputational and business damage.

TMICC is currently trying to remove the chair of Ben & Jerry’s independent board.

It said last month that Anuradha Mittal “no longer meets the criteria” to serve after internal investigations.

An audit of the separate Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, where she is also a trustee, found deficiencies in financial controls and governance. Magnum said the charitable arm risked having funding removed unless the alleged problems were addressed.

The Reuters news agency has since reported that Ms Mittal has no plans to quit her roles, and accused Magnum of attempts to “discredit” her and undermine the authority of the independent board.

Magnum boss Peter ter Kulve said on Monday: “Today is a proud milestone for everyone associated with TMICC. We became the global leader in ice cream as part of the Unilever family. Now, as an independent listed company, we will be more agile, more focused, and more ambitious than ever.”

Commenting on the demerger, Hargreaves Lansdown equity analyst Aarin Chiekrie said: “TMICC is already free cash flow positive, and profitable in its own right. The balance sheet is in decent shape, but dividends are off the cards until 2027 as the group finds its footing as a standalone business.

“That could cause some downward pressure on the share price in the near term, as dividend-focussed investment funds that hold Unilever will be handed TMICC shares, the latter of which they may be forced to sell to abide by their investment mandate.”

Continue Reading

Business

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros ‘could be a problem’, Donald Trump says

Published

on

By

Netflix takeover of Warner Bros 'could be a problem', Donald Trump says

Donald Trump has said he will be “involved” in the decision on whether Netflix should be allowed to buy Warner Bros, as the $72bn (£54bn) deal attracts a media industry backlash.

The US president acknowledged in remarks to reporters there “could be a problem”, acknowledging concerns over the streaming giant’s market dominance.

Crucially, he did not say where he stood on the issue.

Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane

It was revealed on Friday that Netflix, already the world’s biggest streaming service by market share, had agreed to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s TV, film studios and HBO Max streaming division.

The deal aims to complete late next year after the Discovery element of the business, mainly legacy TV channels showing cartoons, news and sport, has been spun off.

But the deal has attracted cross-party criticism on competition grounds, and there is also opposition in Hollywood.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Netflix agrees $72bn takeover of Warner Bros

The Writers Guild of America said: “The world’s largest streaming company swallowing one of its biggest competitors is what antitrust laws were designed to prevent.

“The outcome would eliminate jobs, push down wages, worsen conditions for all entertainment workers, raise prices for consumers, and reduce the volume and diversity of content for all viewers.”

File pic: Reuters
Image:
File pic: Reuters

Republican Senator, Roger Marshall, said in a statement: “Netflix’s attempt to buy Warner Bros would be the largest media takeover in history – and it raises serious red flags for consumers, creators, movie theaters, and local businesses alike.

“One company should not have full vertical control of the content and the distribution pipeline that delivers it. And combining two of the largest streaming platforms is a textbook horizontal Antitrust problem.

“Prices, choice, and creative freedom are at stake. Regulators need to take a hard look at this deal, and realize how harmful it would be for consumers and Western society.”

Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the parent company of Sky News, were two other bidders in the auction process that preceded the announcement.

The Reuters news agency, citing information from sources, said their bids were rejected in favour of Netflix for different reasons.

Paramount’s was seen as having funding concerns, they said, while Comcast’s was deemed not to offer so many earlier benefits.

Read more:
Why Netflix could yet get its way in Trump’s America
Netflix flexes its muscles – and could yet get its way

Paramount is run by David Ellison, the son of the Oracle tech billionaire Larry Ellison, who is a close ally of Mr Trump.

The president said of the Netflix deal’s path to regulatory clearance: “I’ll be involved in that decision”.

On the likely opposition to the deal. he added: “That’s going to be for some economists to tell. But it is a big market share. There’s no question it could be a problem.”

Continue Reading

Business

Young people may lose benefits if they don’t engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Published

on

By

Young people may lose benefits if they don't engage with help from new £820m scheme, government warns

Young people could lose their right to universal credit if they refuse to engage with help from a new scheme without good reason, the government has warned.

Almost one million will gain from plans to get them off benefits and into the workforce, according to officials.

Latest updates from the Politics Hub

Pic: iStock
Image:
Pic: iStock

It comes as the number of young people not in employment, education or training (NEET) has risen by more than a quarter since the COVID pandemic, with around 940,000 16 to 24-year-olds considered as NEET as of September this year, said the Office for National Statistics.

That is an increase of 195,000 in the last two years, mainly driven by increasing sickness and disability rates.

The £820m package includes funding to create 350,000 new workplace opportunities, including training and work experience, which will be offered in industries including construction, hospitality and healthcare.

Around 900,000 people on universal credit will be given a “dedicated work support session”.

That will be followed by four weeks of “intensive support” to help them find work in one of up to six “pathways”, which are: work, work experience, apprenticeships, wider training, learning, or a workplace training programme with a guaranteed interview at the end.

However, Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden has warned that young people could lose some of their benefits if they refuse to engage with the scheme without good reason.

“Doing nothing should not be an option,” he told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“If someone just took that attitude, yes, they would then be subject to, you know, the obligations that are already part of the system.”

“What I want to see is young people in the habit of getting up in the morning, doing the right thing, going to work,” he added.

“That experience of that obligation, but also the sense of pride and purpose that comes with having a job.”

Some young people on benefits will be offered job opportunities in construction. Pic: iStock
Image:
Some young people on benefits will be offered job opportunities in construction. Pic: iStock

Read more from Sky News:
Child poverty strategy unveiled – but not everyone’s happy

Universal credit claimants soar by over million in a year

The government says these pathways will be delivered in coordination with employers, while government-backed guaranteed jobs will be provided for up to 55,000 young people from spring 2026, but only in those areas with the highest need.

However, shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately, from the Conservatives, said the scheme is “an admission the government has no plan for growth, no plan to create real jobs, and no way of measuring whether any of this money delivers results”.

She told Sky News the proposals are a “classic Labour approach” for tackling youth unemployment.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Youth jobs plan ‘the wrong answer’

“What we’ve seen today announced by the government is funding the best part of £1bn on work placements, and government-created jobs for young people. That sounds all very well,” she told Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“But the fact is, and that’s the absurdity of it is, just two weeks ago, we had a budget from the chancellor, which is expected to destroy 200,000 jobs.

“So the problem we have here is a government whose policies are destroying jobs, destroying opportunities for young people, now saying they’re going to spend taxpayers’ money on creating work placements. It’s just simply the wrong answer.”

Ms Whately also said the government needs to tackle people who are unmotivated to work at all, and agreed with Mr McFadden on taking away the right to universal credit if they refuse opportunities to work.

But she said the “main reason” young people are out of work is because “they’re moving on to sickness benefits”.

Ms Whately also pointed to the government’s diminished attempt to slash benefits earlier in the year, where planned welfare cuts were significantly scaled down after opposition from their own MPs.

The funding will also expand youth hubs to help provide advice on writing CVs or seeking training, and also provide housing and mental health support.

Some £34m from the funding will be used to launch a new “Risk of NEET indicator tool”, aimed at identifying those young people who need support before they leave education and become unemployed.

Monitoring of attendance in further education will be bolstered, and automatic enrolment in further education will also be piloted for young people without a place.

Continue Reading

Trending