Afternoon summary
Volodymyr Zelenskyy has met the leaders of the UK, France and Germany in London amid heavy pressure from the Trump administration for Ukraine to cede territory it holds to bring the war to an end quickly. For the latest updates, do read Matty Edwards and Jakub Krupa on our live blog.
Downing Street has defended Britain’s record on freedom of speech – while declining to comment on a White House policy document saying Europe is at risk of “civilisational erasure”. (See 2.12pm.)
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.
Government's ID scheme 'fundamentally un-British', MPs told
Conservative MPs have turned out in large numbers to criticise the government’s plans for a digital ID scheme.
They are in Westminster Hall, where a debate is being held on a petition submitted to the Commons saying the government should rule out digital ID cards. Almost three million people have signed it.
(Minister say it is wrong to talk about a proposed ID card, because they want to introduce a scheme for digital ID that would not even use cards.)
Opening the debate as a member of the petitions committee, Robbie Moore, a Tory, said that this is the fourth highest number of people ever to sign an electronic petition to parliament.
He said that the plans were “fundamentally un-British” and that they were opposed by MPs from all the main opposition parties. And even some Labour ministers are on record as criticising the plan in the past, he said.
The plan would cost £1.8bn, he said. And it would reverse the principle that that citizens should only hand over their data with consent, he said.
As he gave the opening speech in the debate, several Conservative MPs, including Mark Francois, Wendy Morton, Kieran Mullan and Neil Hudson, intervened to say they agreed.
The Labour Jonathan Brash also intervened. He said many constituents had contacted him to say they were worried about the plans. He said one of the problems was that the plan was announced (in a speech by Keir Starmer, just before the Labour conference), but without any of the details being available.
Moore ended his speech saying: “I am not a tin of beans and I do not need a barcode.”
Inquiry into whether police misrepresented intelligence about Maccabi Tel Aviv fans to report before January, MPs told
An inquiry into whether West Midlands police misrepresented the intelligence it used to justify its call for Maccabi Tel Aviv fans to banned from attending a match at Villa Park will report before the end of the year, MPs have been told.
Sarah Jones, the policing minister, disclosed the timetable as she responded to a Commons urgent question from the Tory MP Nick Timothy, who said the WMP chief constable Craig Guildford should quit.
Timothy tabled the UQ after the Sunday Times revealed yesterday that an assistant chief constable at WMP has apologised to members of the local Jewish community after wrongly telling the Commons home affairs committee that they had been consulted about the police’s decision to propose that the Maccabi fans should be banned.
The decision caused an outcry, with Keir Starmer and others taking it as evidence that the police were not willing to defend Israeli fans from the risk of antisemitic violence. WMP say they proposed a ban primarily because they were worried about hooligan behaviour by the Maccabi supporters themselves.
Timothy told MPs that the evidence used by the police to justify their decision had “fallen apart”. He said the police based their decision on what they were supposedly told by the Dutch police about the behaviour of Maccabi fans at a match in Amsterdam in November. But the Dutch authorities have disputed WMP’s version of the evidence provided.
Jones told MPs that HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services, which has already been asked to review the way police decide whether or not fans should be banned ahead of a match, has also been asked to provide by the end of the year an update on how intelligence was gathered by WMP ahead of this match.
She said that, if turned out that the police was not following the highest standards, that would be a matter of “profound concern”.
In response to Timothy’s question about whether ministers still had confidence in the chief constable, Jones said she did not want to jump to conclusions. She said WMP has done some very good work. But it was important to get to the bottom of this issue, she said.
Updated
Justice minister Sarah Sackman rejects Tory claim Lammy used misleading statistic to defend jury trial reduction plan
Sarah Sackman, a justice minister, has rejected claims the government has used a misleading statistics to justify its to plan to limit access to jury trials.
Yesterday the Sunday Times splashed on a story saying that David Lammy, the justice secretary, was being acccused by senior barristers “of misrepresenting figures about rape cases collapsing in a ‘cynical’ attempt to push through the abolition of half of all jury trials”.
Lammy has repeatedly said that 60% of rape victims pull out of rape cases because they are taking so long to go to court. He claims limiting access to jury trials will help to cut the backlog of cases awaiting trail.
The Sunday Times story quoted people arguing that the 60% figure is misleading because most of those victims pull out before anyone has been charged.
In a Commons urgent question, Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, said that if Lammy wanted to remove a major plank of the constitution, he should be doing so “on the basis of facts, not baseless claims”.
Jenrick said the most recent figures showed that only 9% of rape cases are abandoned after charges have been brought. He said that getting rid of jury trials for many cases would plans do “next to nothing to cut backlogs for rape victims” and that Lammy’s claims were undermining faith in the justice system.
But Sackman said that quoting the 60% figure was justified. It was accurate to say that 60% of rape victims pull out of case before they go to trial, she said. She went on:
It is unacceptable around 60% of victims who report broke out of the criminal system. And we know after speaking to victims and to campaign organisations for those that represent those victims and support them, that for many fact that that trial may not come to court for several years is a key factor to them deciding to withdraw from the process, or perhaps not to even report the case at all. The system was not designed for scenarios where victims face just delays or justice.
Updated
Labour challenges Reform UK to explain why it has not yet registered any cryptocurrency donations
The Labour party has challenged Reform UK to explain why it has not yet registered any cryptocurrency donations – even though Nigel Farage, the leader, said in October that the party has started receiving crypto gifts.
In an open letter to Farage, Anna Turley, the Labour chair, challenged him to clarify the situation. She said:
It is of course possible that Reform UK did not receive a single cryptocurrency donation above the donation threshold between May, when you first publicised your party’s willingness to receive such donations, and the end of September, which was the end of Q3 for the purposes of declaring donations to the Electoral Commission, and that your efforts in loudly soliciting and facilitating such donations were an entirely fruitless publicity stunt.
Reform UK started promoting its willingness to receive donations in the form of cryptocurrency in May, and Farage said this was evidence the party was “ahead of the game”.
Reform UK has been asked to comment.
Updated
The all-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax has welcomed the government’s anti-corruption strategy (see 3.06pm), particularly doubling the funding for the domestic corruption unit, holding a summit on illicit finance next year and getting Margaret Hodge to review asset ownership in the UK.
Phil Brickell, the Labour MP who chairs the APPG, said:
I welcome Baroness Hodge’s review into who really owns what in the UK. When crooks can hide behind anonymous shell companies, our security and reputation suffer. We should not be allowing the world’s criminals and kleptocrats to hide and stash their dirty cash here in Britain.
Before entering parliament I worked in anti-bribery roles, and I know most professionals do the right thing – but a few bad actors create huge openings for corruption. That’s why the government’s focus on those dodgy accountants, lawyers and bankers who are letting the vast majority of their profession down is long overdue.
Updated
The Home Office has published the government’s new anti-corruption strategy. Peter Walker covered the main features in his preview story.
Transparency International UK, the anti-corruption campaign group, welcomed the initiative. Its chief executive, Daniel Bruce, said:
This is the most comprehensive government commitment to tackling corruption in almost a decade. We welcome the ambition and the honesty – recognising that corruption threatens Britain’s economy, security, and democracy – and its focus on corrupt insiders, professional enablers, and international partnerships.
But he said the government should also be “removing the corrupting influence of big money from our politics” by imposing a cap on the amount of money that can be donated to political parties, and by imposing spending limits on them.
The latest episode of the Guardian’s Politics Weekly podcast is out. It features Pippa Crerar and Kiran Stacey talking about the Ukraine meeting at Downing Street, Labour’s stance on the EU and how Nigel Farage is handling the scrutiny he’s facing.
Police assess claims Reform UK breached electoral law during Farage campaign
Police are looking into allegations Reform UK breached electoral law during its campaign to win Nigel Farage’s Commons seat at last year’s general election, Kevin Rawlinson reports.
No 10 declines to comment on White House claim Europe facing 'civilisational erasure' due to migration, speech laws and EU
Downing Street has defended Britain’s record on freedom of speech – while declining to comment on a White House policy document saying Europe is at risk of “civilisational erasure”.
At the No 10 lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson said that he would not comment on the national security strategy published by the White House on Friday because it was as US document.
As Jon Henley reports, the document does not just relate to US policy because it says the American government should be “cultivating resistance to Europe’s current trajectory within European nations”.
Referring to Europe as a whole, the document says that it does not spend enough on defence and that it suffers from economic stagnation. But it goes on:
This economic decline is eclipsed by the real and more stark prospect of civilisational erasure. The larger issues facing Europe include activities of the European Union and other transnational bodies that undermine political liberty and sovereignty, migration policies that are transforming the continent and creating strife, censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition, cratering birthrates, and loss of national identities and self-confidence.
At the weekend Sarah Rogers, the US under secretary of state for public diplomacy, reinforced this claim with a post on social media claim that the UK and other European countries are suppressing free speech.
The UK government has repeatedly chosen to avoid saying almost anything critical of Donald Trump and his administration in public and that continued today at the lobby briefing when the PM’s spokesperson was asked if Keir Starmer agreed that Europe faces civilisational erasure. The spokesperson replied:
Obviously that is a strategy devised by the US for the US. It is for them to comment in.
In more broad terms, you’ve seen our action on both legal and illegal migration, and the measures we’re taking to drive that down.
Asked if the PM would stick up for Europe, the spokesperson replied:
The prime minister always sticks up for both the UK and European interests. You’ve seen that in his close working relationship with the president and he’ll continue to do that.
But, when asked about comments from US officials like Rogers saying there is no freedom of speech in the UK, the spokesperson did push back. He said:
When it comes to free speech, our position is very clear. We’re proud of it, we’ve had it in this country for a very long time, we’ll protect it, and the government is committed to open discourse.
Updated
There will be three urgent questions in the Commons after 3.30pm (all tabled by Tory MPs), followed by a statement. They are (with rough timings):
3.30pm: A defence minister responds to a UQ on problems with the Ajax armoured vehicle.
After 4pm: A justice minister responds to a UQ about the Sunday Times splash, which accused David Lammy of misrepresenting the proportion of rape victims who pull out of prosecutions because of court delays.
After 4.30pm: A Home Office minister responds to a UQ about another Sunday Times story, saying West Midlands police wrongly told a committee recently that they had consulted the Jewish community in Birmingham about the Maccabi Tel Aviv match ban.
After 5pm: Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, makes a statement about the government’s child poverty strategy.
John Swinney says independence could cut energy bills in Scotland by one third
Libby Brooks is the Guardian’s Scotland correspondent.
The SNP are making energy the linchpin of their Holyrood election campaign, claiming that independence could cut Scotland’s energy bills by a third in the long term.
At what was billed as the first campaign event ahead of the contest next May, John Swinney, the SNP leader and first minister, launched a short film with the tagline ‘It’s Scotland’s energy’, mirroring the party’s famous 1970s slogan ‘It’s Scotland’s oil’ which contributed to their breakthrough at Westminster.
Contrasting how the UK and Norway managed their oil wealth – a “missed opportunity” for Scotland compared with Norway’s sovereign wealth fund – Swinney said in his speech the growth in renewables was “a second opportunity to benefit from the huge natural resources of our country and to choose a different path”.
But Swinney was light on detail of how independence could be secured even if the SNP wins a majority in May, while the UK Labour government remains opposed to another referendum. And the accompanying document was thin on how these savings would be achieved, especially after the upheaval of separating from the rest of the UK.
Asked whether voters would prefer to see him focusing on their key priorities of public services, Swinney insisted there was progress in NHS waiting times for operations, education and investment in affordable housing. But he added:
Part of my challenge is that people have to see that the way to future prosperity is through independence. That’s the argument I will put to people in May.
Starmer joins TikTok, and says he thinks he's the only world leader on Substack
Keir Starmer has joined TikTok, Downing Street has announced. At the morning lobby briefing the PM’s spokesperson told journalists that Starmer has launched an account there to improve the way he communicates.
But that does not mean that the government is relaxing its security rules about the Chinese-owned app. It is banned on most government apps, and so it is not clear how many ministers and officials using government devices will be able to see the PM’s posts.
As of now, there is only one video on his account – showing Starmer and his wife Victoria outside No 10 watching the Christmas tree lights being turned on.
The spokesperson said that other world leaders, like President Macron of France and the Italian PM, Giorgia Meloni, are also on TikTok. He said:
We are intent on reaching audiences where they are and communication is changing and people have a right to know about the decisions the Government is taking that affect them and why and how that is.
TikTok is simply another way to do that and reach that wider audience.
In another Downing Street communications development, Starmer has also launched a Substack blog. In his first post, which went up on Friday, he wrote at length about the child poverty strategy.
He also explained why he was on Substack, and claimed to be the first world leader with an account.
Since you’ve got this far, I’ll leave you with one final explanation … After all, I think I am the only world leader that has decided to communicate in this way. So you probably want to know: why?
The simple answer is that communication is changing and I want to be part of that. People have a right to know how decisions that affect them are taken and why. And I believe all politicians should explore innovative new ways to do that. So in this Substack that’s what I will be doing. Showing you a little bit of what life is like in Number 10. But mainly just explaining the various decisions I take to try and create that Britain which is built for all.
Unfortunately, Starmer’s first Substack post has received a lousy review from the Financial Times’s Stephen Bush, who has been writing political newsletters from more than a decade and who knows a thing or too about what makes them work. Referring to Starmer’s first effort, he says:
It lacks an overarching argument and does not express a vision, and it is not clear what audience it is pitching for. (It is too wonkish to be easy reading, but not really deep enough for wonks.) These are both familiar problems for this government.
It is obviously inauthentic. We all know Starmer did not actually write this newsletter himself, because a) he doesn’t have the time, and b) he doesn’t even write internal memos and emails to Downing Street staff or cabinet ministers on a regular basis! A regular complaint I hear from Labour veterans is that Starmer does not produce, as Tony Blair used to, a regular memo of his own thoughts for Downing Street staff to guide their thinking and the direction of the government.
Skills minister defends decision to lift cap on unfair dismissal compensation payments in workers' rights bill compromise
Jacqui Smith, the skills minister, has defended the government’s decision to lift the cap on the compensation that can be paid in unfair dismissal cases.
At the end of last month, in what was seen as a major concession to employers, the government announced that it was dropping plans to include day one protection from unfair dismissal in the employment rights bill. Instead protection from unfair dismissal will kick in after six months.
At the same time, but attracting far less attention, the government said it would remove the cap that can be paid to people who win a claim for unfair dismissal. Both amendments to the bill were part a compromise deal negotiated with employers and unions.
Initially the details of how the cap on compensation would be lifted were not clear, but at the end of last week it was confirmed that the cap is being lifted in full. One union described this as a “major win” for workers, and something the trade union movement had been campaigning for years.
But employment lawyers said this would result in more cases going to litigation, because removing the cap would take away the incentive to settle. One described the move as “bonkers”.
Today MPs are again debating the latest Lords amendments to the bill.
Defending the decision to lift the cap on unfair dismissal compensation payments in an interview on Times Radio this morning, Jacqui Smith, the skills minister, said:
Throughout this, there’s been a careful consideration of how we make sure workers have got the rights they deserve and that employers have got the ability to work alongside their trade unions in taking on people into the workplace. That’s what the negotiation has been about.
PM says he would like to see former apprentices in cabinet, as he promotes apprenticeships as alternative to university
Keir Starmer has said that he would like to see former apprentices becoming cabinet ministers.
As PA Media reports, when he was speaking to apprentices at a McLaren facility earlier (see 10.05am), Starmer told them:
We need to crack this in politics, by the way, because around the cabinet table, we did a little survey a few weeks ago, and I think pretty well everyone around the cabinet table had been to university, but no one had been an apprentice.
And so I think the challenge is more in politics than some of our other institutions.
I think business actually has a good case to tell on apprenticeships going all the way to the top, I think its the rest of us that need to do some catching up, because those skills of being in a business, of working your way up and running the business, would be really good skills to have higher up in politics, in my view.
Starmer said he was “on a mission” to promote apprenticeships.
University is good thing to do. I’m not going to knock it. That’s what I did, but being an apprenticeship is an equally good thing to do. That’s what my dad did.
Updated
Peter Kellner, the pollster and former president of YouGov, has been in touch about the Labour Together party membership polling (see 9.12am and 10.17am) to say I was not right when I said earlier that polling party members is difficult because of sample sizes. He explains:
You are right that polling party members is tricky, But it’s not mainly about sample size.
In my YouGov days I was the first to poll party members (IDS v Clarke in the 2001 Tory leadership contest.)
We got it right; but the problem then and since is this. With normal polls we can match our samples to solid, baseline data, from census and other sources, about the demographics of the population. We have no recent data about party memberships – their distribution by gender, age, length of party membership, level of party activity and so on. The concern is that membership polling samples might be too young, too male and too activist. When I was at YouGov I always looked at these subsamples with care. Labour Together should do the same – especially for signs that activists have different views from non-activists, and any systematic differences between younger and older members.
Starmer says any peace in Ukraine has to be just and lastinng ahead of E3 meeting with Zelenskyy
Keir Starmer has said that any peace in Ukraine would have to be just and lasting. Speaking to PA Media this morning ahead of the E3 meeting with Volodymyr Zelenskyy later, he said:
I’m looking forward to seeing President Zelenskyy in Downing Street, where we will have time for a private discussion about the peace plan in Ukraine.
We’ve got Chancellor Merz and President Macron coming as well, so the four of us will have the opportunity to go through the various issues, to do it privately, and to make progress.
“It is important that we bear in mind that this conflict is nearly four years old, that Russia is the aggressor, and therefore, if there is to be a ceasefire, it needs to be just – because Ukraine has taken heavy, heavy losses and paid a very heavy price for a war which was not of their making – but it’s also got to be lasting, because we know Putin does not respect agreements that don’t have hard-edged security guarantees behind them, so that’s what we’ll be focusing on.
Jakub Krupa has more on his on his Europe live blog.
Q: [From LBC] Reform UK are going through a tricky patch. Would you take back any of the Tories who have defected to Reform UK?
Badenoch says people in her party are doing things because they believe them to be right. They are not doing it just because they want to win. She links that with the courage of the survivors on the platform alongside her, saying that they are speaking out because it is the right thing to do.
Q: [From Max Kendix at the Times] The government says having a judge-led inquiry hold things up, because criminal investigations would have to include first.
Badenoch says she does not accept that. It could be a retired judge. And the inquiry could run concurrent with any criminal inquiries.
Q: [From Charles Hymas from the Telegraph] Would you strip people with dual citizenship of British citizenship if convicted of grooming gang abuse? What would you do if you countries like Pakistan would not take them back?
Badenoch says people should not be allowed to exploit dual nationality status. That is why the party set out its citizenship plans at the party conference.
Chris Philp says people with dual nationality should lose their British citizenship if convicted of these offences, and should be removed.
And, if a country like Pakistan does not take back its citizenship, the government should look at visa sanctions or aid cuts to put pressure on them.
Q: [From the Sun] Should mosques have to cooperate with this inquiry?
Badenoch says having a statutory inquiry means organisations should have to provide evidence if that is where the evidence leads.
Q: [From the BBC] Why don’t you work behind closed doors to try to get a party political consensus on this?
“Because we are the opposition,” Badenoch says.
She says Tories are working with Rupert Lowe on his inquiry.
But, from the other parties, she has just heard “sneering”, she says.
She says Labour only agreed to an inquiry because the Tories raised the issue in this way.
Q: [From GB News] One of the potential chairs of the inquiry criticised party political point scoring on this issue. Have you reached out to other parties on this?
Badenoch says the Lib Dem have just made disparaging comments. Labour and other parties are not interested, she says. She says she is doing her job.
She says she does not want this to be about party political point scoring. She wants this to be about justice for victims.
Q: [From ITV’s Romilly Weeks] You say you are acting on behalf of survivors. But don’t different survivors want different things?
Badenoch says she is responding to what survivors are calling for.
Q: And what should happen about the Nigel Farage election expense claims?
Badenoch says the Electoral Commission should investigate.
Badenoch is now taking questions.
Q: [From Sky News] You said you did not want to leave any stones unturned. That is what Sajid Javid said when he ordered an inquiry into this in 2018. The found that most perpetrators were white. Are you saying that was a whitewash?
Badenoch says she is saying there is still a lot of work to be done. The last government set up an inquiry. But its scope was so wide it did not look at this issue in detail.
She says, when she was in government, she did not know what is known now.
Survivors are fed up, she says.
The last government did what it did. But she cannot build a time machine and go backwards.
Badenoch publishes proposed terms of reference for grooming gangs inquiry she says should finish in two years
Kemi Badenoch is holding a press conference now. She is with Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, and some survivors of grooming gangs abuse.
There is a live feed here.
The Conservatives have published some proposed terms of reference for the national grooming gangs inquiry promised by the government. Badenoch said the inquiry should be about giving a voice to people who have been voiceless, and said it was important for the government to highlight the way allegations were not investigated because the perpetrators were mainly of Pakistani origin, and officials and local politicians were worried about being viewed as racist.
Under the Tory plan, the inquiry would have to report within two years.
Here is the Conservative party’s summary of its terms of reference. The inquiry would have to:
-Investigate the prevalence and nature of organised grooming networks, with a focus on extra-familial abuse.
-Consider whether offenders display shared religious, ethnic, national, family, or clan characteristics.
-Examine whether State institutions failed to act due to concerns about the characteristics of suspects or victims.
-Investigate whether any individuals in public bodies ignored, concealed, or facilitated abuse.
-Hear detailed survivor testimony to identify failures in reporting, policing, CPS decisions, court processes, sentencing, and post-release management.
-Assess the harms suffered by survivors and their families as a result of both abuse and institutional responses.
-Forward evidence to police and prosecutors where criminality is indicated.
-Make recommendations to prevent future abuse and improve redress for victims.
These are from Pippa Crerar, the Guardian’s political editor, on the leadership issue.
Keir Starmer wants Angela Rayner to return to cabinet: “Yes. She’s hugely talented”.
He told @RSylvester1: “Yes, of course I do. I was really sad we lost her. As I said to her at the time, she’s going to be a major voice in the Labour movement.”
But PM is bullish about prospect of standing aside from leadership, saying he has “defied” his detractors before: “And that’s what I intend to do.”
It’s clear to me that while planning is definitely underway in several camps, nobody (yet) wants to be one to wield the knife.
Labour Together has not issued a formal response to the Times story. (See 9.12am.) But sources briefed on what the thinktank has been doing insist the leadership survey is “a bit of a non-story”.
The thinktank wants better data on what members think and it is developing a panel that will provide insight into this, it is said. Other polling companies have asked members who they would prefer most as leader, and Labour Together wants its own data on this so it can benchmark its findings against the results from other surveys. It views this questionnaire as an experiment.
But it also says it wants to know what members think on a range of issues. The results will be shared with No 10.
Updated
Keir Starmer is now doing a Q&A with apprentices as the McLaren facility.
He tells them about his decision to say apprenticeships should have equal status with university degrees, which was a theme of his speech to the Labour conference.
And he says this an issue he is having to discuss now with his son, who is 17. He is having to choose between university and an apprenticeship, he says.
Skills minister says she feels 'frustration' about Labour thinktank's decision to poll members on party's leadership
Jacqui Smith, the skills minister, told the Today programme this morning that she felt “a certain element of frustration” about Labour Together surveying party members about the leadership. But the questions were part of “a very wide-ranging survey”, she said.
She said that, if anyone asked her, she would say she was supporting Keir Starmer because he was doing “a good job” and she said the government should focus on “the things that actually will make a difference for people”, like the new apprenticeships being announced today. (See 9.33am.)
Updated
Starmer announces. 50,000 new apprenticeships as part of skills reform programme
Keir Starmer is today announcing a £725m investement to deliver 50,000 new apprenticeships. As the Department for Work and Pensions announces in its news release, this will include the government covering the full cost of apprenticeships for people under the age of 25 at small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and mayors have more control over apprenticeship funding. The DWP says:
The £725m package of reforms to the apprenticeship system will help to tackle youth unemployment and drive economic growth, with thousands more young people expected to benefit over the next three years.
The latest funding includes a £140m for a pilot where mayors will be able to connect young people – especially those not in education, employment or training (NEET) with thousands of apprenticeship opportunities at local employers.
By partnering with regional leaders who best understand their local economies, these pilots will ensure young people can access training that meets the needs of employers in their area.
As part of the package, the government will also cover the full cost of apprenticeships for eligible young people under 25 at small and medium-sized businesses.
Removing the 5% co-investment rate for SME’s means that the training costs for all eligible under 25 apprentices are fully funded opening up thousands of opportunities for young people. This will make it easier for young people to find opportunities and remove the burden from businesses, making it easier for them to take on young talent.
This follows an announcement yesterday about 350,000 new training or workplace opportunities being offered to young people.
Farage urged to ‘come clean’ over alleged election spending breaches in Clacton
The Reform UK leader, Nigel Farage, has been urged to “come clean” over his election campaign in Clacton after a former aide claimed his party breached spending rules, Kevin Rawlinson reports.
Labour Together reportedly canvassing party members on leadership candidates
Good morning. The most significant event of the day will probably be the meeting that Keir Starmer is hosting in Downing Street for the E3 (the leaders of Britain, France and Germany), and the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
There will be some mention of that here, but Jakub Krupa will be leading the coverage of that on his Europe live blog.
Before that meeting starts, Starmer will be on a visit to promote a government announcement about 50,000 new apprenticeships being offered. In a news release, the Department for Work and Pension says:
50,000 young people across the country will be better equipped for jobs of the future through a major investment to create more apprenticeships and training courses.
The £725m package of reforms to the apprenticeship system will help to tackle youth unemployment and drive economic growth, with thousands more young people expected to benefit over the next three years.
The latest funding includes a £140m for a pilot where mayors will be able to connect young people – especially those not in education, employment or training (NEET) with thousands of apprenticeship opportunities at local employers.
But Starmer is likely to face questions about a story in the Times by Patrick Maguire saying that Labour Together, the Labour thinktank that used to be run by Morgan McSweeney, the PM’s chief of staff, and that played a role in helping Starmer win the Labour leadership, is surveying Labour party members to find out if they think any of potentially eight other candidates might make a better leader for the party at the next election. Maguire says:
A survey sent to local Labour parties, seen by The Times, prompted members to name the politicians who stood “the best chance of leading Labour to electoral victory at the next general election” compared with Starmer and to rank those they would be likely to vote for in a leadership election.
Eight senior Labour politicians were named alongside Starmer. The five cabinet ministers in the survey are Wes Streeting, the health secretary; Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary; Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary; Ed Miliband, the energy secretary; and Darren Jones, the chief secretary to the prime minister.
Labour Together also listed Angela Rayner, the former deputy prime minister; Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester; and Lucy Powell, who was elected deputy leader of the Labour Party in October.
The thinktank is also asking party members if they prefer “Labour politicians who have principles but are prepared to compromise to get the best outcome possible” or “Labour politicians who stand by their principles no matter what”.
Labour Together, which is now run by Alison Phillips, the former editor of the Daily Mirror, has not commented on the story. There have been suggestions that it wants the data so that it can benchmark the accuracy of its own membership polling against the results of polling conducted by other organisations. (Getting accurate polling data about members of political parties is notoriously hard, because the samples are small.) [UPDATE: See 11.30am for more on this point.]
But the fact that it is even asking these questions will confirm suspicions that party insiders are gearing up for a leadership challenge at some point within the next year. Although sometimes described as a Starmerite thinktank (because of the McSweeney link), Labour Together was not set up to support Starmer’s bid for the leadership. The founders were primarily concerned with opposing Corbynism, and in the period before the 2019 election it spent a lot of money on internal party polling that showed that, while a majority of members supported Jeremy Corbyn and his values, there were enough of them who cared about winning the next election to make it possible for a non-leftwinger to succeed him.
Here is the agenda for the day.
Morning: Keir Starmer is visiting a McLaren facility to promote government plans to make available 50,000 new apprenticeships.
10am: John Swinney, Scotland’s first minister, gives a speech on independence.
10.30am: Kemi Badenoch holds a press conference about the proposed Tory terms for reference for the national inquiry into grooming gangs.
11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.
Lunchtime: Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president, Emmanuel Macron, the French president, and Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, are due to arrive at Downing Street for talks with Starmer.
2pm: David Lammy, the deputy PM and justice secretary, gives a speech on measures to stop the UK being used as a base for money laundering.
2.30pm: Pat McFadden, the work and pensions secretary, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about the child poverty reduction strategy.
3pm: Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, gives evidence to the Commons environmental audit committee on the Cop30 conference.
If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), 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
