Rachel Reeves can’t win, can she?

[anothervoter]

After days and days of negative press and chatter about income tax going up, complaints on Mumsnet and across the media, today’s reports are that idea might be dropped and now she’s being accused of rattling the markets and making the cost of borrowing increase.

Honestly, genuine question- what can she do?

Reeves / Starmer did pledge to not raise taxes anyway.

Labour's manifesto is, "fully funded and fully costed - no ifs, no ands, no buts… no additional tax rises."

"I have been very clear that every policy we announce, and every line in our manifesto, will be fully costed and fully funded."

“Nothing in our plans requires any additional tax to be increased.”

Trafficking gangs would be smashed
Nobody knows whether they have or what work is being done behind the scenes

If they have been smashed then it’s not proving very effective as boats full of people are still arriving.

Also, since it isn’t illegal to arrive by boat and claim asylum, what laws are the gangs actually breaking?

Yes the point is it’s meant to reduce crossings. It clearly hasn’t as they’ve gone up.

Trafficking people is illegal.

@Blossomtoes

It was actually income tax, NI and VAT, none of which have increased for employees.

That you didn’t mention employers is noted. Increased unemployment has been attributed to increased cost to employers.

Nobody knows whether they have or what work is being done behind the scenes

The number of people arriving by boat has increased significantly since Labour took office. So, whatever is being done it’s not working out.

And is hasn’t. Sadly.

To trigger Article 49 would require an act of Parliament. So, why hasn’t Starmer as PM, or any other MP, suggested there should be a vote?

To trigger Article 49 would require an act of Parliament. So, why hasn’t Starmer as PM, or any other MP, suggested there should be a vote?

Because there’s nothing to vote on perhaps.

@blossomtoes

Because there’s nothing to vote on perhaps.

So, all MPs have decided that it’s not in the UK’s interests to rejoin the EU?

You’re complaining about the government not keeping promises. This is a promise it’s showing no indication of breaking so now you’re moaning about that! There really is no pleasing some people, is there?

Whatever Keir Starmer does with the EU its guaranteed to be the wrong thing. Hes already messed up with the promise about the fishing in return for not very much at all. Keir Starmer really is the worst negotiator. Lord knows why he loves swanning about abroad so much rather than being at home.

Actually its obvious why he prefers not to be in the UK, being the most unpopular PM of all time. Probably a bit embarrassing for him.

Well, Reform have no ideas on how to stop the boats and nothing on foreign policy, apart from to cosy up to Trump and Putin.

They are an empty vessel.

We know the Tories cannot control expenditure, they had 14years to have a go and failed.

Labour are in and they are for the next 3.5 years, they've also beaten the growth the Tories gave us and have taken legal migration from 1.2m to 345k per year, still too high but a massive decrease on Johnson and Sunak gave us.

Hell, a multi millionaire says Don't tax me anymore!

The LDs and the Greens wont form the next Govt.

Taxes had to go up, the NHS, Roads, Public buildings all falling apart, plus compensation scandals and the independent pay review body increases, Hunts NI cut and of course Defence spend, which has to double.

The Tories didn't plan on funding ANY of these, they knew they'd lose, so didn't care.

Faced with these immediate demands, how would you have raised the money for these?
Or would you have not funded any of them?

@blossomtoes

This is a promise it’s showing no indication of breaking

So, what are the talks about making payments to the EU for single market access about?

@Leavesfalling

Whatever Keir Starmer does with the EU its guaranteed to be the wrong thing.

That’s what’s scary about talks he is having with the EU regards youth mobility and making payments for access to single market.

Talk’s cheap @GlobeTrotter2000. There’s nothing concrete.

I would focus on cutting spending and reforming our tax system entirely to drive growth. I would abolish the OBR because they are driving much of the hysteria - it's their constant 'forecasts' which they keep getting wrong which means we have the black holes which turn out to be different sizes depending on who is counting. They are also entirely unaccountable and Rachel Reeves can't seem to do anything without their say so. It's ridiculous.

Taxes possibly did have to go up, maybe they didn't need to go up very much. Economists are not in agreement on that. The left will always go for tax rises - it's all they know.

What I do know is employers' NICs was a mistake if you are focused on growth. People said it at the time and we're seeing the impact now in employment figures and lack of investment.

@Southernecho

Taxes had to go up, the NHS, Roads, Public buildings all falling apart,…

So, why did Labour state in their manifesto that taxes would not increase and everything was costed? If that’s not a lie, what is?

Too right. RR had all the information at her fingertips if she had bothered to look.

I suppose accounts and economics are tricky to understand if you were mainly in the complaints department though. Maybe that's why she made such mistakes in the manifesto.

Reform of the tax system would take years and they'd be winners and losers, its why no one does it!
Welfare reform would raise some money but no where near enough and not immediately.
Look whats happening off the coast of Scotland, one the UK few destroyers shadowing a Russian ship which may well seek to destroy our pipes and cables, we need defence spend now, not in 10 years.

The left always goes for tax rises? really? have you been asleep during the Tories handling of the economy and the highest tax burden since WW2.

Any tax increase has downsides, say she'd raised income tax/NI and VAT instead?
That would have stalled consumer spend, increased inflation, hitting growth and employment.

I think, given the urgency of the issues, NI on business, was probably the best worst way to raise the money.

It was the worst worst way to raise money and she knew it. A percentage point on income tax would have been way better and done far less harm to the economy. But we all know they made that stupid pledge before the election.

Did they honestly have so little faith in their ability to get elected that they had to lie in order to do so? She knew what was ahead of her, no-one is accepting the line that it was worse than they thought. That was widely discredited last summer.

And she could have reversed the NI cuts that Jeremy Hunt bought in - why didn't she do that? Business would have accepted that more than what she did to the employer thresholds and rates instead.

They would say things were far worse than they realised.
Tariffs and extra Defence spend weren't even considered in July 2024, the Tories went into that election promising to cut defence even more.

Opposition parties do not have detailed access to Govt finances or their plans to fund current spending or in Hunts case, not too.

That’s extremely odd because the OBR didn’t have that information and there had been no Spending Review since 2021. Where was the information at her fingertips? There was plenty of unfunded expenditure left for her to find money for - the NI cuts, compensation for post office owners and blood scandal victims, the resident doctors’ pay settlement that was kicked down the road …

So take £800 out of the average employees pay packet? no affect on the economy there! not!

1p on income tax? try 4p to raise what she did.

no affect on the economy whatsoever!!!

Trafficking people is illegal

@blossomtoes , I googled people trafficking just to see what the rules were and it came up with this:
Distinction from People Smuggling
People trafficking is distinct from people smuggling (migrant smuggling). Smuggling involves the voluntary consent of a person to be moved illegally across an international border, and the relationship ends upon arrival at the destination. Trafficking, in contrast, is a crime against the individual involving ongoing exploitation and a lack of genuine consent due to the use of force, fraud, or coercion

I would guess the people arriving in boats are more likely smuggled, eg consenting, but I may be wrong.
However it isn’t illegal to arrive in a country and claim asylum so unless the government can prove the refugees have been trafficked I don’t see what laws have been broken.

What part of moved illegally across an international border ^are you having trouble with?

The NI cuts were so recent, it would have been a more seamless transition. It's moving the thresholds on employer NI that has been as damaging as the increase - affects more people on part time work especially women.