Afternoon summary
A government led by the Green party would not set targets for GDP growth but would instead focus on people’s mental health, social cohesion and community welfare, Zack Polanski has said in a major speech to set out his plans for the economy. Here is an analysis of the speech by Heather Stewart, the Guardian’s economics editor.
Andy Burnham has backed stark criticism of the direction of Keir Starmer’s government by Angela Rayner after she said the very survival of the Labour party was at stake. And here is an edited extract from Rayner’s speech.
For a full list of all the stories covered on the blog today, do scroll through the list of key event headlines near the top of the blog.
This is from Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, on Nick Timothy (see 10.28am) on Bluesky.
Christians, Jews, Sikhs and Hindus have all prayed in Trafalgar Square.
Nick Timothy singled out Muslims, then had the brass neck today to sit on the front bench. He should be sacked.
The Tories are following Reform into the gutter. Neither are fit to govern.
Kendall says government may require AI-generated content to be labelled
The UK could require AI-generated content to be labelled as part of efforts to protect consumers from disinformation and deepfakes, the Press Association reports. PA says:
Technology secretary Liz Kendall said a taskforce would propose how best to go about labelling such content as she signalled a shift from previous plans to allow an exemption to copyright laws so works could be used to train artificial intelligence.
She said in a written statement: “It can be helpful to consumers to understand whether content has been made using AI.
“It may also help protect against disinformation and harmful deepfakes.
“We will establish a taskforce to put forward proposals for government on best practice for labelling AI-generated content, with an interim report to be published in autumn.”
There is currently no obligation to label AI-generated content in the UK, but many services already have labelling technology and several countries have introduced their own labelling rules, a newly released report and impact assessment on copyright and AI notes.
Kendall also said a consultation on how to deal with digital replicas, when someone’s likeness is replicated without their permission, will be launched in the summer.
A review into how creators can control their works online will also be published with a view to considering whether the government should get involved, and a working group will be set up for independent creatives.
England should give over 7% of land to nature and renewables to meet environmental targets, data shows
About 7% of England’s land – an area roughly two-and-a-half times the size of Cornwall – will need to be given over to nature, forests and renewable energy, to meet the UK’s environmental targets, new data shows. Fiona Harvey has the story.
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing the PM’s political spokesperson did not commit firmly to the government pressing ahead with the immigration reforms criticised by Angela Rayner. (See 8.52am.)
But subsequently a government spokesperson issued a statement saying they were going ahead. The spokesperson said:
The government’s position has not changed.
We will always welcome those that come to this country and contribute to our national life, but the privilege of living here forever should be earned, not automatic.
Starmer still keen to see Rayner return to government at some point, No 10 says
Downing Street has said that Keir Starmer still wants to see Angela Rayner back in government at some point.
At the post-PMQs lobby briefing, asked whether Starmer stood by his past comments about Rayner in the light of her speech last night, the PM’s political spokesperson said:
You’ve heard from the Prime Minister direct on that when he’s been asked this before, he said that she is hugely talented, that he was really sad that he lost her, and he would like to see her return to the cabinet.
Asked whether that position still stood, the spokesman said it did.
The spokesperson also said Starmer shares with Rayner “an impatience to deliver the change people voted for”.
Reform UK-supporting students at Scottish university being investigated for alleged racism and mocking disabled person
Severin Carrell is the Guardian’s Scotland editor.
Reform UK-supporting students at St Andrews university are under investigation for alleged racism and mocking someone with a disability, after Reform itself complained about alleged intimidation of a party meeting last week.
Reform said today it had written to the university in Fife, Scotland, famous for its association with Prince William and Catherine, after people believed to be students harangued a group of Reform supporters in a pub on Friday night.
Footage on Instagram suggested the clash was verbal without any physical acts, but Malcolm Offord, Reform UK’s Scottish leader, claimed the event was “hijacked by a gang of hard-left agitators who hurled abuse and tried to intimidate young people into silence.”
Suella Braverman, the party’s UK education and skills spokesperson at Westminster, said:
What happened at St Andrews was mob rule. Students were targeted simply for supporting Reform UK, such behaviour that has no place in a university. St Andrews university must show it still stands for open debate and intellectual freedom. Reform UK will always defend Scotland’s universities and the principle of free speech.
A university spokesman said it had not yet received the complaint Offord publicised, but added:
We have a culture of robust debate at St Andrews, and that is precisely as it should be at an international university with a diverse and politically engaged student population.
Freedom of speech does not, however, extend to the right to intimidate others and there is no place for that type of behaviour here, nor for attempts to stoke culture wars. We have invited the Reform Society to submit a complaint so that these allegations can be properly investigated.
We are also investigating a complaint that some people at a recent Reform Society event made racist remarks and publicly mocked a person with a disability.
Another Instagram reel appeared to show one of the protestors being warned by a pub employee to stop shouting or face being made to leave.
Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, was one of the Muslims praying in Trafalgar Square on Monday at the event criticised by Nick Timothy. (See 10.28am.) He posted this on social media yesterday responding to the shadow justice secretary’s outburst.
Here's an Iftar on Trafalgar Square.
— Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan (@MayorofLondon) March 17, 2026
And here’s Easter, Diwali, Vaisakhi and Chanukah.
London is, and will always be, a place for everyone. #UnityOverDivision https://t.co/bqUNBaL0og pic.twitter.com/wm8tvEL6QQ
Labour says Polanski's speech shows he has 'wrong answers on economy'
Labour has said that Zack Polanski has “the wrong answers” on the economy. Responding to Polanski’s speech this morning, Anna Turley, the Labour chair, said:
Zack Polanski has the wrong answers on the economy. Respected economists have sounded the alarm over the Greens’ “catastrophic” plans to print money, which would hammer working people and their living standards.
Polanski attacks Tory austerity now but as a Lib Dem during the coalition years he was a cheerleader for it at the time - even though it saw public services slashed and people made poorer. You can’t trust him.
But there was a more positive response from the thinktank Common Wealth. Its director, Mathew Lawrence, said:
Zack Polanski is right. With global energy prices spiking, we need action to decouple the price of electricity from expensive gas so that we don’t get a repeat of the last energy crisis: where energy giants made vast windfalls while people struggled to heat their homes.
Starmer revives attack on Badenoch and Farage over Iran policy, and says early 'negotiated settlement' best outcome
Alexandra Topping is a Guardian political correspondent.
Keir Starmer today reprised his accusations made at PMQs last week that Badenoch had criticised Starmer for not immediately backing US and Israel’s attacks on Iran, then reversed her position.
He told MPs today:
She didn’t do the work. She didn’t think through the consequences.
Committing our military to a war without thinking through the consequences is the gravest mistake a leader of the opposition can have. And she comes back a week later and says, oops, I got that one wrong. She’s utterly irrelevant and she’s got no judgment.
Starmer also attacked Reform leader Nigel Farage, who he said he was “perfectly, perfectly clear” that Britain should be involved in initial attacks on Iran by the US and Israel.
Starmer went on:
Just like the leader of the opposition, the member for Clacton said we should do all we can to support the US strikes. And he said, “I made that perfectly, perfectly clear.”
It was perfectly, perfectly clear he got it completely wrong and perfectly clear that he’s now desperately trying to U-turn. He had absolutely no judgment and he is not fit to be prime minister.
Asked if he would guarantee that MPs would get a vote before the UK became involved in any further conflict, Starmer said:
Unlike the leader of the opposition, my principles have been clear and unwavering. We will protect our people in the region. We will take action to defend ourselves and our allies, and we will not be drawn into the wider war.
I want to see this war end as quickly as possible. The longer it continues, the bigger the impact on the cost of living.
And that’s why we’ve intervened to support households with costs of heating oil.
The best way forward is a negotiated settlement, with Iran giving up any aspirations to develop a nuclear weapon.
Updated
Lee Anderson filmed paid-for Cameo videos at parliament in possible rules breach
The Reform UK MP Lee Anderson has used his parliamentary office to record paid-for personalised messaging videos, in a possible breach of rules that prohibit the commercial use of the Palace of Westminster, Henry Dyer and Michael Goodier report.
Polanski says Greens would ditch GDP targets and focus on wellbeing instead
Here is Peter Walker’s report of Zack Polanski’s economy speech, and what he said in his Q&A afterwards.
At a post-PMQs briefing, a spokesperson for Kemi Badenoch defended Nick Timothy for his comments criticising Muslims praying in Trafalgar Square. (See 10.28am.) The spokesperson said Timothy’s comments were based on footage showing segregated males praying at the event.
He said:
The Conservative party believes in British values and those British values mean we are an open and open and tolerant society, but with boundaries.
And freedom of religion does not mean the freedom to do anything. It comes with responsibilities.
People are free to practice their faith, but that practice does not require exclusionary use of our shared civic spaces. That is not about worship. It becomes something else which undermines social cohesion. So that is where we draw the line. And that is what Nick Timothy was talking about.
Asked about other pictures showing women at the event, the spokesman said they were “outside the barriers”.
(Timothy’s original tweet criticising the Muslims praying in Trafalgar Square said nothing about the group being segregated by gender. And a follow-up tweet by Timothy this morning defending his original message does not mention gender segregation either.)
PMQs - snap verdict
It is not unusual for the prime minister and the leader of the oppostion to be speaking at cross-purposes at PMQs but today was an extreme example; if your only exposure to what happened comes via short social media clips, you might assume they were speaking at two separate events.
Kemi Badenoch was determined to attack Keir Starmer again over his appointment of Peter Mandelson as ambassador to the UK, and she started by asking if Starmer had spoken to Mandelson personally about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein before he appointed him. Badenoch knew exactly what the answer was – because it was a lead story in the Times last week. The Times reported:
Sir Keir Starmer did not speak to Lord Mandelson before appointing him as the ambassador to the US and instead delegated the vetting of his links to the paedophile Jeffrey Epstein to two personal friends of the peer.
Starmer refused to confirm this. But he did not try to deny it either, and it was obvious from the exchanges that the Times story was true. Badenoch was withering, and – on this topic – effective.
Starmer strategy was to turn this instead into a debate about the Tories’ rather confused stance on the Iran war, and Nick Timothy latest anti-Muslim diatribe. (See 10.28am.) In debate, trying to fend off an attack by changing the subject is always a sign of weakness (because it’s an admission that you do not a proper answer to the accusations you are facing) and it is often unsuccessful (because the audience may consider the original topic more important than the distraction topic). But it can work if the counter blast is strong enough.
What about today? Tory MPs were indignant about Starmer’s worse-than-usual topic dodging, and there were a string of questions about this at points of order. The Tory papers (and GB News – see 12.27pm) will write this up as a Badenoch win. And people watching who had not spent the morning on Twitter might have been a bit unsure as to what Starmer was on about when he repeatedly condemned Nick Timothy.
But Labour MPs understood why the Timothy intervention was so inflammatory. The normalisation of Islamophobia in rightwing circles is one of the more egregious features of modern politics, and today Starmer spoke about it with more passion and authenticity than we are used to. Here is one of his answers.
[Badenoch’s] position is that the shadow justice secretary is defending British values when he says Muslims praying together in Trafalgar Square are not welcome.
Even Tommy Robinson, I can hardly believe I’m saying this, has said today that if the shadow justice secretary had made these hateful comments two years ago the Conservative party would have kicked him out.
Tommy Robinson isn’t some sort of moral signpost, he was pointing out how much their party has changed. They’re more inclined to his views, and he’s right about that. The fact he’s sitting on her front bench shows she’s too weak and has got absolutely no judgment.
Starmer was referring to this post by Robinson (whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) on X.
Since Morgan McSweeney left No 10, Starmer seems to have become more confident defending the multiculturalism that some Blue Labour types were more inclined to question and today it felt as he had landed a moral argument successfully. He’ll count that as win.
Updated
Andrew Snowden (Con) asks why Starmer refused to answer Badenoch’s questions about Peter Mandelson. When he found out Mandelson had an ongoing relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, did he speak to him personally before making him ambassador?
Starmer says he has set out the process.
And he is not surprised the Tories do not want to talk about the Iran war, or Nick Timothy.
Greg Smith (Con) says Starmer used to oppose HS2, as he does. He asks for his Mid Buckinghamshire consituents to be treated with fairness as this goes ahead.
Starmer agrees people affected by HS2 do need to be treated fairly.
Noah Law (Lab) asks if Starmer will meet the Labour rural MPs group to discuss extra help for farmers.
Starmer says the government has already set up a farming and food partnership board to help the sector.
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, says the Norwegians have opened 49 drill sites for oil in the last year. The UK has opened none. He says Britain should follow Norway.
Starmer says oil and gas will be part of the UK’s energy mix for years to come.
And he says Farage is highlighting the consequences of a war he supported.
Starmer defends plans to restrict access to jury trials
David Davis (Con) says when Starmer was a laywer he argued that scrapping juries would increase the chance of miscarriages of justice. And the Institute for Government says it will not save as much money as the government claims.
Starmer says he is not abolishing jury trials. Many victims have to wait years for cases to go to trial. He says he is not prepared to do nothing about this. Under this plan, the proportion of cases that go to jury trial will just fall from 3% to 2.25%.
(The figure is just 3% if you include all cases that would not go to a jury, because they are heard by magistrates, and guilty pleas.)
UPDATE: Starmer said:
We’re not abolishing jury trials, and he knows that.
I have worked with with women and girls who have been victims of sexual violence and rape, who have waited a very, very long time for their cases to come to court. Many of them drop out because of the wait.
They have described to me personally, the mental anguish that they go through when their case can’t get heard for years, when they’re told of adjournment time and time again. I’m not prepared to look them in the eye any longer and not do something about it. We owe it to them.
This is about getting the balance right. We’re not abolishing jury trial. There’s about 3% of cases go to jury trial, as he very well knows, 97% don’t. After this, it’ll be 2.25%. That is the difference between the policy we’re advancing and the policy as it now is.
So it’s not abolishing jury trials. But I’m not prepared to see those who have been victims of violence against women and girls, I’m not prepared to see them repeatedly let down.
That’s what happened for 14 long years. It’s not good enough.
Updated
Paul Davies (Lab) says, under Reform UK, decent healthcare would only be available to people who can afford it.
Starmer says waiting lists are at their lowest level for three years, and the best ambulance response times for five years, because of Labour’s investment in the NHS.
Dawn Butler (Lab) asks Starmer to back calls for phone manufacturers to be required to install a kill switch on phones that will stop them being used if they have been stolen.
Starmer says the government would like to work with the industry on this issue.
Ed Davey demands Ofcom crackdown after report showing GB News has become Reform UK propaganda channel
Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, says the Trident missiles will reach the end of their lives in the 2040s. We can either lease more from the US or build or own to replace them? Does the PM agree with the Tories we should stick with the US come what may?
Starmer says Davey does not know how much his proposal would cost.
Davey says the French can afford their own deterrent.
He asks about a report suggesting GB News has become a Reform UK propaganda channel. Does the PM agree that Ofcom should stop this?
Starmer just says this is a matter for Ofcom.
Davey was referring to this New World report by the former Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger.
UPDATE: Davey said:
A New World investigation into GB News has found hundreds of shocking breaches of the rules of impartiality and accuracy yet Ofcom has repeatedly refused to take action.
We cannot let GB News propaganda turn our great country into their version of Trump’s America.
Either the government rules aren’t fit for purpose or Ofcom isn’t properly enforcing them. Prime Minister, which is it?
And Starmer replied:
He’s right to raise an important question of free speech and our media.
It is a matter for Ofcom and it’s important we let them deal with it.
Updated
Claire Hanna (SDLP) says we have seen the events from the Middle East before. In Irish there is as saying, ‘Have we learned no lessons?” She asks for an assurance MPs will get a vote on any action in the Middle East.
Starmer says, unlike Badenoch, his principles have been clear. He says he will not let the UK be dragged into a wider war.
Badenoch asks why people should believe Starmer on anything in the light of his answers on Mandelson.
Starmer again criticises Badenoch’s leaderhip over Iran. And he says her failure to condemn Timothy “for the poison and division he spreads” is telling.
UPDATE: Starmer said:
The failure to condemn and sack the shadow justice secretary for the poison and division that he spreads, it’s turning out to be quite a month for the leader of the opposition who claims she never makes any mistakes.
Updated
Starmer says Timothy comments suggest Tories have problem with Muslims
Badenoch says Starmer knew that Mandelson had kept a relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Why did the PM believe him?
Starmer says the Tories only object to Muslims praying in Trafalgar Square, not people of other faiths. He says people will conclude the Tories have a problem with Muslims.
UPDATE: Starmer said:
When I see religious events in Trafalgar Square, when I see Hindus celebrating Diwali, when I see Jews celebrating Chanukah live, when I see Christians performing the Passion of the Christ, or Muslims praying, that shows the great strength of our diverse city and country.
I’ve never heard her party call out anything other than the Muslim events. It’s only when Muslims are praying. The only conclusion is the Tory party has got a problem with Muslims.
Updated
Badenoch defends Timothy over his attack on Muslims praying, saying he was 'defending British values'
Badenoch defends Timothy, saying he was “defending British values”.
She says Starmer’s refusal to answer the Mandelson question implies he did not speak to Mandelson personally.
Starmer left it up to two of Mandelson’s friends to ask him about his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, one of whom was friends with a paedophile.
Starmer says even Tommy Robinson has said that in the past Nick Timothy would have been sacked for his comments.
Starmer says Nick Timothy should be sacked for his attack on Muslims praying in Trafalgar Square
Badenoch says Starmer did not answer the question. Did he pick up the phone to Mandelson.
She says Starmer said Mandelson lied to him. That implied that they spoke.
Starmer again criticises Badenoch. He says she should have sacked Nick Timothy for his attack on Muslims praying in Trafalgar Square. (See 10.28am.)
UPDATE: Starmer said:
She appointed the shadow justice secretary. He said last night that Muslims praying in public, including the mayor of London, practising his faith are not welcome.
He described it as an act of domination. Straight from the Islamist playbook. If he was in my team, he’d be gone. It’s utterly appalling. She should denounce his comments and she should sack him.
Updated
Badenoch again asks if Starmer spoke to Mandleson before appointing him.
Starmer says Mandelson was questioned before he was appointed. He admits his judgment on this was wrong. But he says Badenoch’s judgment over Iran was flawed.
Starmer ducks question about whether or not he spoke to Mandelson before making him US ambassador
Kemi Badenoch asks if Starmer spoke to Peter Mandelson before he appointed him ambassador to the US.
(It has been reported that he didn’t.)
Starmer says he has already apologised for the appointment. The process was flawed, he says.
Marie Tidball (Lab) asks for details of how disabled and other vulnerable people will be able to access the heating oil support.
Starmer says his instinct will always be to help people. But the best way to address the problem would be to end the war in the Middle East, he says. He says that shows why the leaders who backed the war were wrong.
Wendy Morton (Con) says 60% of hospices are considering cutting services. Will the government commit to long-term funding for hospices?
Starmer says the government supports the work of hospices, and will give them long-term funding to sustain them.
Starmer faces Badenoch at PMQs
Keir Starmer starts by offering condolences to the family and friends of the two young people who have died in the meningitis outbreak in Kent.
He says anyone who attended Club Chemistry on Canterbury on 5, 6 or 7 March should come forward to get antibiotics.
He says he has met President Zelenskyy, Mark Carney and Mark Rutte in Downing Street this week.
Updated
Starmer faces Badenoch at PMQs
PMQs is about to start.
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.
Polanski's economy speech - snap verdict
A few months ago Zack Polanski was interviewed by Alastair Campbell and Rory Stewart on their Rest is Politics: Leading podcast. Mostly the conversation was quite good humoured, but at one point Stewart, a former Tory cabinet minister, started pressing Polanski quite aggressively on some basic economics (how much the UK spends a year on debt interest, for example), and Polanski was stumped for answers. It clearly rankled with him because afterwards he complained frequently, saying he had been ambushed on a topic (economics) he had been told in advance would not come up.
But, as well as annoying Polanski, the interview also seems to have prompted him to try to firm up his authority and credibility on economic policy. And today’s speech was the result.
It was meaty and substantial. Green party members will like it because it firms up and spotlights some of their retail policy offers. And, although Labour MPs may object to many of his proposals (even on the left, there is a mainstream view that rent controls “don’t work”), they will agree with much of his analysis. Polanski’s argument about the damage done by Thatcherite privatisation and Obsornite austerity is something that could have come straight out of an Andy Burnham speech.
Ministers will probably attack Polanski for his suggestion that the government pays too much attention to the bond market (see 11.17am), just as Burnham was criticised for a similar comment. Quite what Polanski meant by “exit the bond market doom loop” wasn’t quite clear. It will be for others to say quite how credible, or not, this is. But this was a serious speech, that at least opens up an economic argument, with analysis that stands up and policy that is memorable. Polanski will probably view that as a decent response to Rory Stewart.
Updated
The Q&A is still going on, but the live feed I have been using has cut out. Never mind; a Guardian reporter is there, and so I will post any updates when I get them.
This is what the Labour party issued last night in response to the trail of the Polanski speech issued by the Greens.
This Labour government has the right economic plan for Britain - delivering stability in our public finances, investment in infrastructure and higher living standards after years of Conservative failure. We’re ending austerity, supporting families, fixing our NHS, cutting child poverty, improving workers’ rights, tackling the housing crisis and taking action on climate change and clean energy.
The Greens have the wrong answers and no plan. Only a Labour government can deliver for Britain.
This does not address the specifics in the speech – but the Green party speech preview did not include those either, so it is understandable why the rebuttal is vague.
Polanski says Keir Starmer’s comments attacking the Greens over their drugs policy were “disgusting”. People are dying from drug use, he says. He says this shows it is a serious problem. It should be taken seriously. Starmer’s comments debased the debate, he says.
Polanski is now taking questions.
The first one includes a question about Polanski’s time as a hypnotherapist, when he told a Sun reporter that he could use hypnotism to increase the size of her breasts.
Polanski says he has apologised for this several times before. He quotes Tony Benn as saying, in politics, what matters is not where you have come from, but where you are going.
Polanski says the other parties do not have policies to address “rip-off Britain”.
And he ends by saying this speech is “just the beginning”.
We will be setting out our plans in more detail as we approach the general election. And at the centre of everything, there will always be three very simple questions. How do we make life more affordable? How do we back the caring majority over the wealthy elite? And how do we protect our planet for generations to come?
Polanski calls for new approach to fiscal rules, saying UK must 'exit bond market doom loop'
Polanski says the government should adopt a new approach to fiscal rules.
First, it should not treat the national budget like a household budget, he says.
We must stop equating the government’s finances with a household’s. This false equivalence has been a poison in British politics for too long. Hospitals, schools, transport starved of investment. And that costs us every day. In money, in stress, in time.
Second, he says, the government must “exit the bond market doom loop”.
Our fiscal framework is hypersensitive to market movements. And this creates policy uncertainty that then fuels the very market jitters it is there to supposedly prevent. And you don’t have to just take my word for it. Even the IFS, the supposed custodians of fiscal responsibility, are saying the framework is “dysfunctional.”
And, third, he said government spending plans should make more long-term assumptions.
UK fiscal forecasting currently relies on rigid fiscal multiplier assumptions that constrain effective government policy. By assuming that spending multipliers expire after 5 years, the current model is prioritising short-term fiscal targets over the longer-term economic and social gains that targeted government spending could achieve. Right now we can’t plan major infrastructure projects. We can’t invest properly in a healthy, educated population. Right now, we can’t build our future.
Updated
Polanski says wealth tax would be 'day one priority' for Greens
Polanski turns to tax, and says that a wealth tax would be a priority for the Greens.
We know that a wealth tax won’t fix everything, and no one’s ever pretended it would, but it’s a good place to start. Implementing a 1% tax on wealth over £10 million and 2% over £1 billion would raise around £15 billion per year - and send a very clear message that those who have accumulated the most money, will pay a little bit more - and get that money flowing through the economy, and benefiting everyone.
For a truly progressive government a wealth tax should be a day one priority.
And the Greens would cut energy bills, Polanski says.
We need to cut energy bills. We need to massively scale up our investment in clean energy infrastructure to secure our energy independence and increase our resilience as a country. And in the shorter term we should stop the price of gas inflating the price of electricity, ending the possibility for gas plants to charge high prices when gas-fired electricity is needed to make up an energy shortfall.
Polanski says Greens would nationalise water companies, claiming this would 'bring down bills'
Polanski says the Greens would nationalise water companies to cut bills.
Nearly a third of the typical water bill in England goes to funding shareholder returns and debt servicing, compared to around ten per cent for publicly owned Scottish Water.
That’s shocking – hundreds of pounds every year that people work hard to earn, going straight into shareholders’ coffers. Let’s end private ownership of water, bring down bills, and make our water system fit for purpose.
Polanski says Greens would bring in rent controls, saying they work in 16 other European countries
On cost of living, Polanski starts by saying the Greens would bring in rent controls.
We know that rent controls can work, and we can learn so much from the different models that have been tried elsewhere. Rent controls are an established part of private renting in 16 European countries and it couldn’t be clearer that the UK’s got some catching up to do.
If we had frozen rents in autumn 2022, households in Britain would be saving over £3,300 per year on average. Across Britain, that would put £18bn of purchasing power back in the pockets of ordinary people – money that could be spent in local businesses, buying a coffee on the way to work or a few pints at the end of a hard week.
Polanski says the Greens’ victory in the Gorton and Denton byelection showed how strongly people want a different approach.
He says he will cover three aspects of his party’s plans in his speech today.
I’m going to talk to you about the three central planks of our plan: tackling the cost of living crisis and bringing down inflation; overhauling our tax system so the uber-wealthy pay their share; and modernising fiscal policy so it’s fit to tackle the challenges of today.
Brexit has been 'sledgehammer to an already weak economy', Polanski says
Polanski turns to Brexit.
The evidence of the impacts are clear. Employment down, Investment down, productivity down. The economy is 6-8% smaller than it would have been. Hundreds of pounds added to the average household’s shopping bill. Leaving the EU has been a sledgehammer to an already weak economy.
Polanski calls for more compassion in society, saying it's 'literally been privatised'
Polanski says politicians should be talking about compassion more.
Now look, other politicians may shy away from talking about compassion but it’s what we need to bring back into our societies. And it’s literally been privatised.
We only need to look at the scandal of privately owned children’s homes. A report by the Competition and Markets Authority was unequivocal. It said that ‘the largest private providers of placements are making higher profits than we would expect if this market were functioning effectively.’
If ever there was a sign of a sick economy, one which lacked care, had been stripped of compassion - this is it.
'It's clear we've rewarded greed and punished compassion for too long,' says Polanski
Polanski turns to the rise in the number of billionaires in the UK.
In 1990, when I was going through primary school, and there were 15 billionaires in the UK. By last year, that number had risen to 154. And let’s look at how those people are making their money: today, more than 1 in 4 billionaires draw some or all of their wealth from property and inheritance.
That is money being made, not by putting anything into the economy, like running a businesses, creating jobs or making a product – but simply from sitting on assets or charging somebody else for the use of them.
It’s clear that we’ve rewarded greed and punished compassion for too long.
Polanski says it was not just Thatcherism that led to today’s problems.
The damage didn’t end with Thatcherism. Instead, that damage was turbocharged by austerity after the crisis of 2008 hit.
Cloaked in misleading analogies about maxed-out credit cards and household budgets, austerity was not a solution to the crisis, but a project which used the crisis as an opportunity to facilitate an enormous upward transfer of wealth from the many to the few.
Public spending eviscerated - look at local government for example. When accounting for population growth, spending power fell 27.5% in real terms between 2010 and 2020. In real words, that’s our libraries, our parks, the public services we all rely on …
This sustained project of privatisation and deregulation turned Britain from a place which made things people need to a place which made money for people who owned things
Polanski says Greens would 'end right to buy completely'
Polanski turns to housing.
One in six private renters is now renting a former council home, often at extortionate rates – and often partly paid for by the government in the form of housing benefit. Another example of a system which is not only totally unfair but utterly incoherent …
So we need to end right to buy completely. Build more council homes. And control rents so everyone can afford a decent roof over their heads.
Polanski says, before he explains what he would do to end “rip-off Britain”, he wants to explain how we got here.
He describes growing up in the 1980s, and says Margaret Thatcher’s privatisation policies were a cause of what has gone wrong today.
The month I was born, Salford docks shut down – 3,000 dock workers losing their jobs.
By that time, 400,000 council homes had already been sold off under right to buy. And as I was growing up, Thatcher was selling off the state’s vital assets one by one – British Gas in 86, water in 89. When I talk to young people about this, they can’t believe it. We used to own these things, and we sold them off.We know the impact of those changes. By the time the Tories left office, over £60 billion’s worth of precious state assets had been sold. A bonfire sale of our water, our energy, our railways – and so many other fundamental services – meant UK Public Wealth went from the Highest in the G7 to the Lowest, just over those two decades.
The consequences of this rigged economy for British people are still with us today – biting at our heels as we try to make ends meet.
And he cites the water industry as a particular example of where privatisation has gone wrong.
Nature isn’t separate from our economy. It is the foundation of the economy. And right now we’re letting it be destroyed – and for what? For shareholder returns.
Updated
Polanski says we live in rip-off Britain.
Other countries have been able to learn the lessons from previous crises and prepare – why is our response so weak when disaster strikes?
The answer, put simply, is that we live in rip-off Britain: an economy built to reward the few off the work of the many. A country where people work so hard and try to do the right thing but still struggle to afford the basics, and people find themselves constantly cutting back.
Polanski says government should commit to energy price cap not going any higher, funded by tougher windfall tax
Polanski says the government should be doing more to improve home insulation, and on the drive towards renewable energy.
And he says the government should commit to ensuring energy bills do not rise above the April-June price cap.
The government should guarantee right now that it will not allow energy bills to rise beyond the April-June price cap – instead setting aside approximately £8.4bn to prevent a rise of up to £300 per household that could be coming down the track.
No, it’s not cheap. But the alternative is unacceptable: if the price cap rises, we will see interest rate rises. Mortgage rates up. Bond yields up. And inflation up – and we will be back into the doom loop that has done untold damage to our economy and caused misery for households across the UK for years now.
Explaining how this could be funded, he says:
There are ways to pay. Instead of scrapping the windfall tax on energy companies, as this government is planning to do, we should be strengthening it instead. We need a real, loophole-free windfall tax with no exemptions for reinvesting in fossil fuels. A robust tax that claws back every single pound of reckless profiteering from this crisis and repurposes it immediately to protect every home in the country. And while taxing extreme wealth in the ways we need to will take time to implement, there are levers the government could pull right now – like equalising capital gains tax with income tax and reforming the base, to raise £12bn.
It’s time for the government to act decisively, eliminate the uncertainty that is plaguing people and the markets and insulate us from some of the worst economic effects of Trump’s war.
Polanski says it is 'unacceptable' that people will face 'enormous spike' in costs due to Iran war
Polanski is speaking now.
He starts by talking about the Iran war, describing it as a war of choice.
This was not a war of self-defence, there was no imminent threat. Negotiations were ongoing. It was, as the BBC’s international editor said, a war of choice.
People across the Middle East are terrified of what Trump and Netanyanhu’s war will mean for them and their loved ones. And the repercussions are echoing across the world as instability spreads and oil prices spike.
He says ordinary people will pay the price for this.
People are already struggling so hard just to make ends meet. People feel like they’re running every day just to stay in the same place. The idea that yet again – for the second time in just a few years – that we are going to have to deal with another enormous spike in the cost of the basics is unacceptable.
It’s unacceptable because we didn’t need to be here. It’s unforgivable that just four years after we last saw an energy price shock, that one triggered by Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, far too little has been done to protect this country, its people, and its economy – from the impact of yet another energy price shock.
Sriskandarajah says the NEF is registered charity. That means it cannot have favoured political parties, he says. But he says the NEF is very pleased to have Polanski as a speaker.
Danny Sriskandarajah, the chief executive of the New Economics Foundation, is introducing Polanski now. He says this is an event to mark the NEF’s 40th anniversary.
He says NEF was set up to challenge the orthodoxies of “growth economics”.
This chimes with Green party thinking. As the Economist pointed out in a recent article about the Green party’s economic policies, the Greens, unlike other parties, are not preoccupied with growth. The Economist said:
Molly Scott Cato, the Green Party’s economy spokesperson, has long had a simple prescription for growth: stop pursuing it. In 2006 she published “Market Schmarket”, an ecological critique of capitalism that bemoaned the sacrifices made “at the altar of the growth fetish”. Amid tips to get an allotment and buy Fairtrade coffee, private-sector workers are encouraged to “cut [their] hours of work at least by half” to weaken the capitalist system.
This anti-growth mindset continues to suffuse Green thinking. The party’s manifesto for the 2024 general election devoted only one paragraph to economic growth, arguing that its damage to the planet “is actively undermining our well-being”. (The Labour manifesto mentioned growth nearly 50 times.)
Zack Polanski gives speech on economy
Zack Polanski, the Green party leader, is about to give a speech on the economy. It is his first major speech on the subject since he became Green leader, and he is speaking to the New Economics Foundation thinktank.
Here is Peter Walker’s preview story.
Tories defend shadow minister Nick Timothy after he claimed mass prayer by Muslims in London 'act of domination'
A member of the shadow cabinet has defended Nick Timothy, the shadow justice secretary, after he was criticised for saying he objected to Muslims taking part in a mass prayer event in Trafalgar Square.
In a post on social media yesterday, Timothy complained about Muslims engaging in mass prayer at an event in Trafalgar Square. “Mass ritual prayer in public places is an act of domination,” he claimed.
Too many are too polite to say this.
— Nick Timothy MP (@NJ_Timothy) March 17, 2026
But mass ritual prayer in public places is an act of domination.
The adhan - which declares there is no god but allah and Muhammad is his messenger - is, when called in a public place, a declaration of domination.
Perform these rituals in… pic.twitter.com/PIfJAgb7Zk
In response, the Labour MP Sarah Owen posted this on Bluesky.
Wait until he sees Trafalgar Square during Christmas, Hanukkah, Holi, Lunar New Year, PRIDE, Vaisakhi and the passion of Jesus.
Trafalgar Square really is for everyone.
Nick Timothy either knows that and is deliberately stirring up hatred or he isn’t that bright.
Either way, he should do better.
Dominic Grieve, the former Tory attorney general (who subsequently quit the party over Brexit, posted this.
This is a very odd post from a Conservative who says he believes in freedom of expression under law and is a principal spokesman of the Free Speech Union.
I appreciate that he does not like Islam and there is no reason why he should. As a Christian it is not my faith.
But the use of Trafalgar Square ( with permission) for religious events Christian and other goes back a long way. There have been prayers and hymns, chants and religious events performed there in the past. If such an event ‘shouldn’t happen again’ it raises the question of whether this is to apply to all religious events or just to Muslim ones. If to all, then we are moving like France to imposing secularism as a norm and it is contrary to our national tradition and does not seem to have helped develop social cohesion there.If just to Muslims then it is an act of discrimination against them without any lawful basis. To achieve it you would have to enact discriminatory legislation targeted at Muslims. Is this what Nick Timothy is advocating ?
And on Bluesky Sunder Katwala, director of British Future, a thinktank focusing on race and cohesion, has posted examples of various other faith events taking place in Trafalgar Square which don’t seem to have upset Timothy (they did not involve Muslims). Katwala says:
If the Shadow Lord Chancellor says “it should not happen again”, is it now Conservative policy to ban an Iftar in a public square in London, or elsewhere?
- What current/new law?
- Or to make it an offence to pray in public? or to limit the number doing so, for a specific faith, or several/all]?
On Sky News this morning, Richard Holden, the shadow transport secretary, said he agreed that Trafalgar Square belonged to everyone. But if they were being used by religous groups “to try and dominate”, that was wrong, he said.
He said there was a place for religion in the public sphere. “But when it is used as a weapon to oppress people, I think that’s wrong,” he said.
Asked if he thought mass ritual prayer was always an “act of domination”, Holden replied: “It can be, in certain circumstances … for all sorts of different groups.”
Updated
Minister rejects Rayner's claim Home Office plan to make migrants wait longer for settled status 'un-British'
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, argued in interviews this morning that people in government agreed with Angela Rayner about wanting to deliver change quickly. (See 8.52am.)
But he would not accept her criticisms of Shabana Mahmood’s plan to make most immigrants wait much longer until they can apply for indefinite leave to remain. Rayner said this was “un-British”, because the new rules will apply to people already in the UK, which she argued did not amount to fair play. Thomas-Symonds said he disagreed.
He told Times Radio:
No I don’t think that the changes Shabana Mahmood has announced are un-British.
I think what they are doing is trying to strike fairness and a balance between, in the first instance, control of our borders, and also people who are here still having the opportunity then to gain a settled status, but also being fair to everybody.
Angela Rayner’s speech last night came a day after the Financial Times ran a report saying she had been speaking to City investors telling them they did not need to worry about a Labour government. Both interventions will be seen as evidence that she is preparing for a leadership bid at some point in the not-to-distant future.
In their FT story, Ian Smith, Katie Martin and Jim Pickard said:
Angela Rayner joined a call with City investors in which the bookies’ favourite to replace Sir Keir Starmer as prime minister offered reassurance that Labour would not lurch to the left.
Investors on the call, hosted by French bank BNP Paribas this month, said the former deputy prime minister pledged the party would stick to its manifesto and not resort to a borrowing blitz to fund greater spending.
A Rayner ally told the FT that, as a senior MP, Rayner had been engaging with the business community for years.
This is from Aubrey Allegretti from the Times, quoting an unnamed Labour MP furious about Angela Rayner’s speech.
Rayner’s remarks already causing fury…
A senior Labour MP texts: “It might help if those vying for [the] leadership at least try to understand the policy they are attacking. There is absolutely no intention to not let people stay, it’s about delaying access to welfare and benefits after unprecedented levels of migration - the public expect their government to run the country in a way that does not put more strain on our services, whilst also remaining compassionate.
“It took the Tories 10 or so years to descend into chaos - if egos in the party think they can cause chaos and challenge the leadership after 18 months and not get the blow back they are wrong. Get a grip and deal with your tax.”
Burnham says Labour should listen to Angela Rayner after she warns party ‘running out of time’ to deliver change
Good morning. Keir Starmer has been handling the Iran war reasonably well, according to the consensus view at Westminster, and certainly better than Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch, who have been in contortions over whether they do or do not support Donald Trump. But this has not altered the fundamental, big-picture assessment of British politics, which is that he is deeply unpopular with voters and that Labour can’t win the next election if he remains in charge. This may be a flawed analysis – consensus views often are – but it is what many Labour MPs think, which is why a question mark hovers over Starmer’s leadership.
And that is why Angela Rayner’s speech last night, at a private meeting with the soft-left Mainstream group, are so significant. She did not explicitly call for new leadership, but she did convey that message implicity – and more bluntly than in any of her other interventions since she resigned as deputy PM in September last year.
Here is our overnight story by Nadeem Badshah.
In her speech Rayner said:
It is down to us to rebuild this nation and this party – the question is are we up for this fight? I know we in this room are.
As a party, and as a movement, we cannot hide, we cannot just go through the motions in the face of decline. There’s no safe ground and we’re running out of time.
The change that people wanted so desperately needs to be seen, it needs to be felt. And we have to show that it is a Labour government that will deliver it.
And she said the government was “running out of time” to show it can deliver the change that the public needs.
She also included a passage in the speech highly critical of the plans from Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, to significantly increase the amount of time migrants in the UK have to wait until they can get indefinite leave to remain (ILR). She was particularly scathing about the proposal for the new rules to cover people in the UK already in the queue for ILR. She said:
We cannot talk about earning a settlement if we keep moving the goalposts. Because moving the goalposts undermines our sense of fair play. It’s un-British.
Let us be a country that has sustainable economic migration rules, but one that upholds the British values we want all who live here to respect. Not special treatment. But the stability and a fair pathway forward after the sacrifices many have made to build a lawful life in the UK.
If we suddenly change that, it pulls the rug from under those that have planned their lives and commitments, and they’re contributing to our economy and to our society.
That would not just be bad policy, but a breach of trust. The people already in the system who made a huge investment now fear for their future. We cannot talk about earning a settlement if we keep moving the goalposts because moving the goalposts undermines a sense of fair play. It’s un-British.
These remarks seemed designed to kill off a policy already unpopular with many Labour MPs.
Mainstream is associated with Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, who, like Rayner, is seen as a leading contender to replace Starmer as Labour leader. Burnham was on the Today programme this morning, and he offered qualified support for what Rayner said, but without sounding overtly disloyal. Asked about her remarks, he said Labour “would always do well to listen to what Angela has got to say”. He went on:
We’ve got to, all of us, haven’t we, work together to pull together a plan that turns the country around …
I understand the frustration people feel. We heard that at the by-election, and of course, Angela is reflecting some of that.
But what I do feel that the signs are becoming really clear that there is a higher ambition, particularly for the north of England.
In particular, Burnham praised the plans for fiscal devolution announced by Rachel Reeves yesterday. That was “exactly what we want to see”, he said.
Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Cabinet Office minister, has been the government voice on broadcast news programmes this morning. Asked abour Rayner’s speech, he said Keir Starmer and his team were also impatient for change. He told Sky News:
I think where I would agree, and I think everybody across government would agree, is sharing an impatience with the pace of change, and that applies to every single one of us.
And I get the sense, I haven’t read the full context of Angela’s remarks, but I get the sense that that frustration is actually what is running through her remarks. It absolutely runs through every government minister as well.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10.30am: Zack Polanski gives what is being billed as his first big speech on the economy since becoming Green party leader. Here is Peter Walker’s preview.
Noon: Keir Starmer faces Kemi Badenoch at PMQs.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (between 10am and 3pm), or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.
If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @andrewsparrowgdn.bsky.social. The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary.
I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
Updated
