STEPHEN GLOVER: Why is this Government so breathtakingly bad? Because Starmer is confused, incoherent - and tragically miscast as PM

• e-mail

Why is this Government so breathtakingly bad that even many who voted Labour are now regretting it?

This is a question I often ask myself. It is baffling that a party that has had 14 years to prepare for office, and enjoys an enormous majority, should be making such a hash of things.

There are so many examples of incompetence that one hardly knows where to begin. The latest evidence of a lack of joined-up government has to do with taxes on business.

Earlier this week, Rachel Reeves assured business leaders at the CBI conference that she was ‘not going to come back for more’. Yet within 24 hours Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds contradicted the Chancellor by saying that the Government was only committed to ensuring that future tax rises wouldn’t be ‘comparable’ to those in the recent Budget.

Two senior ministers saying opposing things in public. That doesn’t happen often in a normal government. Which of them is right? Very possibly neither. Before this crew has finished with us, I expect business will suffer far higher taxes.

On Tuesday, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall told the Commons that sickness benefit will be reformed to encourage people back to work. But nothing will happen immediately. Good God, no! A review will not take place until next spring, after which the Government will come up with some policies.

Meanwhile, state handouts to people in poor health – 2.8 million of them, and rising, at the latest count – are ballooning at a rate of £266 million a month as an average extra 17,000 claimants sign on.

This Government is in love with reviews. It promised 14 of them in its election manifesto. They offer a way of kicking the can down the road, and postponing difficult decisions.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves told business leaders at this week's CBI conference that she was ‘not going to come back for more’. Yet within 24 hours was contradicted by Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds, writes Stephen Glover

There is a war in Europe. Russia is mounting cyber attacks against British businesses and official bodies. What is the Government’s response? To conduct a Strategic Defence Review to consider the threats facing us, and what we should do.

Last month, Defence Secretary John Healey admitted that British armed forces are ‘not ready to fight’ a war. What a disgrace – for which the Tories should take much blame.

But instead of matching the last government’s belated pledge to spend 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence, and going further as it should do, Labour has deferred a decision until its review completes its deliberations, probably next spring. If Putin had a sense of humour, he would die laughing.

Sometimes, of course, the Government does make up its mind, though often without thinking through the consequences. Its two most ham-fisted policies illustrate the point.

Rachel Reeves announced in the early weeks of this horror show that the winter fuel allowance would be abolished for all but the very poorest pensioners. This will cause widespread distress while saving the Treasury some £1.5 billion a year, about one eight hundredth of annual public spending.

Then, for an even smaller gain, came the Chancellor’s assault on farmers in the Budget, subjecting them to an inheritance tax rate of 20 per cent over £1 million. This unjust and petty measure has appalled many voters, especially in the countryside.

An intelligent government would have deprived only the wealthy of their winter fuel allowance. An intelligent government would have targeted speculators who avoid inheritance tax by buying large tracts of land. Instead of which, the Chancellor clobbered family farms.

We can, and should, blame the cackhanded Rachel Reeves, who has recently chosen to amend her CV to remove a claim that she worked as an economist for Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering politics.

But the man ultimately responsible is Sir Keir Starmer. I don’t only mean that the buck stops with him. I also mean that his lack of consistent political beliefs – his want of conviction – infuses the entire Government, and helps to explain why it is all over the place.

Keir Starmer has 'dropped most of the policies, such as the abolition of tuition fees and the renationalisation of utility companies' that he campaigned on before the General Election

On Tuesday, Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall told the Commons that sickness benefit will be reformed to encourage people back to work - but nothing will happen immediately

Here is someone who campaigned to be leader of the Labour Party in 2020 on a Hard Left, Corbynista platform. Gradually he dropped most of the policies, such as the abolition of tuition fees and the renationalisation of utility companies. He then endlessly proclaimed that he has changed Labour.

But had he? In two areas at least – a Green New Deal and enhanced workers’ rights – he hasn’t shed his extreme 2020 positions. It’s instructive that Ed Miliband with net zero measures and Angela Rayner with new workers’ rights (estimated to cost business up to £5 billion a year) are the two ministers who have been given the freest range.

Until, in Mr Miliband’s case, car manufacturers complain that they’re being driven out of business in Britain by official targets (enforced by fines) to sell an impossibly large proportion of electric vehicles. The Government is suddenly frightened that it is killing off Britain’s car industry. Another example of its inability to work out sensible priorities.

What kind of man is Sir Keir Starmer? What does he really believe in? Is he pro-Israel or anti-Israel? In favour of getting along with Donald Trump or against? Does he believe in higher taxes for businesses, or not?

Read More

We're on the brink of nuclear war and this hopeless Government is provoking Putin: STEPHEN GLOVER

I strongly suspect that on many issues Starmer doesn’t know what he thinks, though the old class warrior lurking inside his head intermittently offers some guidance, as when it comes to applying VAT on private school fees or impoverishing family farms.

One thing is clear. He adores getting away. The Prime Minister has made 15 trips abroad, most of them unnecessary, since entering No 10 in early July. As his administration has rocked and spluttered, he has spent the best part of a month out of the country.

The Government’s lack of direction stems from the man at the top. It appears confused and incoherent because Sir Keir is confused and incoherent. I wouldn’t object so much if he were a competent pragmatist, but he’s not even that.

One worthwhile review would be into the mind of Sir Keir Starmer. It would find a man tragically miscast who is leading the most incompetent government in recent British history, which is saying something.

This is what Starmer said about the Tories at Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday: ‘They don’t know what they’re doing from one day to the next. Living in this fantasy world where everything was fine apparently, for 14 years. But the country is fed up with those fantasies... We’re going to take the hard decisions. They’re jumping on every bandwagon that’s passing. We’re taking the country forward.’

Isn’t Sir Keir, a man seemingly without any self-knowledge, describing himself?

I’m not saying there’s a better person waiting in the wings – say Wes Streeting. With or without Starmer, Labour’s whole project is doomed because it doesn’t have a sensible fixed policy.

Not far short of three million optimistic souls have signed a petition calling for an election. They might as well bay at the moon. We are stuck with this lot for the next four and a half years, and I tremble at the thought of the further harm they are going to do.