Starmer Dilutes Pledges Amid Economic Challenges

[Social Media]

 

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer unveiled his new “Plan for Change” on Thursday, diluting two key election pledges as the UK economy grapples with challenges following his tax-raising Budget. Among the revised commitments, Starmer reduced the ambition for achieving a fully low-carbon energy supply by 2030, now aiming for 95 per cent instead of the originally promised 100 per cent. Additionally, a pledge to secure the highest economic growth in the G7 has been downgraded to an “aim,” with no commitment to achieving it before the next election.

 

The announcement coincided with troubling economic signals. A Bank of England survey revealed that over half of businesses anticipated price increases and job cuts due to October’s National Insurance rise. The Confederation of British Industry also downgraded growth forecasts for 2024 and 2025, attributing the downturn to reduced investment and consumer confidence caused by the Budget.  

 

Starmer presented the blueprint at Pinewood Studios in Buckinghamshire, insisting it was not a “reset” despite declining poll ratings. The plan outlined broad goals, such as reducing NHS waiting times to 18 weeks, increasing household incomes, ensuring school readiness for more five-year-olds, building 1.5 million homes, and hiring 13,000 new police officers. However, it lacked specific pledges to address critical issues, including reducing net migration and tackling the rising number of welfare recipients signed off sick – a growing post-pandemic trend Starmer acknowledged but did not directly address.  

 

Labour’s ambitious housebuilding plans, intended to boost economic growth, drew concerns from the National Federation of Builders, which warned that significantly more migrant workers would be needed to meet the targets. Similarly, while the Plan reiterated the goal of increasing defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP from its current 2.3 per cent, it failed to specify a timeline for achieving it.  

 

The Plan for Change introduced six “milestones” supplementing five pre-election “missions,” alongside three “foundations” and seven “pillars for growth.” Critics quickly pounced on the complexity of the framework. Even Liz Kendall, Work and Pensions Secretary, acknowledged that the structure risked being “overcomplicated.”  

 

Starmer’s dilution of two flagship pledges attracted particular scrutiny. Earlier, Labour had committed to achieving “100 per cent clean and cheap power” by 2030, but industry experts had widely questioned the feasibility of the zero-carbon electricity target. Currently, the UK’s clean energy figure stands at just over 60 per cent. The revised 95 per cent target is seen as more achievable but falls short of the party’s earlier vision.  

 

In another shift, Starmer introduced a new promise to increase GDP per person and real household disposable income before the next general election. Critics were quick to dismiss this as uninspiring, noting that every government since World War II has met this standard. Tom Waters from the Institute for Fiscal Studies called the target “very unambitious,” while the Resolution Foundation described it as “the absolute bare minimum.”  

 

The Conservatives seized on the perceived lack of ambition and coherence in Labour’s plan. Alex Burghart, shadow chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, derided the announcement as evidence of a government in disarray. “The latest Labour reset – after only five months – is another sign that the wheels are off and are bouncing down the street,” he remarked.  

 

Starmer’s new blueprint underscores the challenges his government faces in managing economic recovery while maintaining credibility with the electorate. Whether the Plan for Change will restore confidence or further erode support remains to be seen.

 

Based on a report by Daily Telegraph 2024-12-07

 

 

 

[wombat]

Starmer is a trojan horse closet Tory 

[The Cyclist]

8 hours ago, Social Media said:

Additionally, a pledge to secure the highest economic growth in the G7 has been downgraded to an “aim,” with no commitment to achieving it before the next election.

 

8 hours ago, Social Media said:

A Bank of England survey revealed that over half of businesses anticipated price increases and job cuts due to October’s National Insurance rise. The Confederation of British Industry also downgraded growth forecasts for 2024 and 2025, attributing the downturn to reduced investment and consumer confidence caused by the Budget.  

 

How do you achieve growth, when you implement a Budget that is the antithesis of growth ?
 

Give it 6 months for the effects to work through the system, then the real fun and games will begin.

[topt]

1 hour ago, wombat said:

Starmer is a trojan horse closet Tory 

Source?

Much more than what?

 

[RichardColeman]

Economic challenges ? Happens when you pay off your backers and pay for hotels for foreigners !

[James105]

4 hours ago, The Cyclist said:

How do you achieve growth, when you implement a Budget that is the antithesis of growth ?
 

Give it 6 months for the effects to work through the system, then the real fun and games will begin.

 

Once these morons realise that growth has stalled and/or we are in recession and they cannot afford to give £13bn to overseas climate aid, or pay £5.8bn a year for illegal immigrants, or spaff £22bn on carbon capture, or the £13bn foreign aid budget, or £8bn on GB energy or any of the other virtue signaling vanity projects they will be faced with a "tough" choice.. To either scrap the spending on this nonsense or punish the working/middle class with means tested pensions (just for private sector workers), even more taxes or other punitive measures.  I think we all know which option these morons will choose.    My bet is on means tested state pensions for private sector workers as they really hate the pensioners.  

[JonnyF]

Recession within 6 months.

 

The UK has made a colossal mistake allowing Starmer and his clown posse 4 years to damage the country. 

 

Like giving your car keys to a 10 year old with behavioural issues. 

 

 

[wombat]

18 hours ago, topt said:

Source?

Much more than what?

 

 

[topt]

@wombat thank you for clarifying.

[James105]

5 hours ago, wombat said:

 

 

That figure might be correct if every single non-dom remains in the UK and does nothing whatsoever to either relocate or rearrange their tax matters.   In reality it will be nothing like £3.2bn and just like every attempt to "tax the rich" it will probably end up costing more to the economy than it raises.   Even the Tories were not so incompetent to go down that road.  

 

Just look at the reaction of farangs over here facing the prospect of being taxed on their overseas income (like the non-doms in the UK).   Virtually every single one is looking at ways of avoiding this, by either gifting it, looking at double taxation treaties or simply ensuring they do not stay in Thailand for 180 days of a calendar year when they replenish their bank accounts. 

[JonnyF]

Labour's policy seems to be to drive out wealthy successful people while importing poor intolerant people.

 

I guess it makes sense if you hate the country and want to destroy it. 

[Chomper Higgot]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Labour's policy seems to be to drive out wealthy successful people while importing poor intolerant people.

 

I guess it makes sense if you hate the country and want to destroy it. 

At least he wants to live there.