Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Open the editor’s digest for free
FT editor Rula Khalaf picks her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.
The UK government’s pleas for regulators to come up with development proposals have simply been lost. It’s not completely foolproof for regulators to announce that their exchanges are subject to change – but only as long as they consult those who know what it’s like to be regulated. Here, as so often with this government, the signs are confusing.
It’s hard to manage. There is some schadenfreude among former administration soldiers as Labor’s dawn is recognized after six months in office. As Sir Keir Starmer lashed out at what he called the “decline of sanity”, he was expressing frustration with every new prime minister. In his case, however, the lack of a clear management philosophy makes matters worse.
The new administration is full of energetic ministers, working hard. But there is little to read. Rather than a group with a coherent analysis of what is wrong with Britain and what it needs to do, the Cabinet looks like a collection of individuals with different views of the world.
Listening to the chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster promise to “make the kingdom like one,” the science and technology minister wax lyrical about artificial intelligence, or the health secretary talk about patient choice, we can feel hopeful. A completely different opinion has been created by the education secretary, who is trying to turn back the clock by ripping up two decades of reformed cross-party policy. Schools. And the deputy prime minister’s gargantuan workers’ rights package is undermining business confidence, despite the Treasury’s attempts to restore it.
All government parties are coalitions of interests. But the amount of disagreement on this issue makes it difficult to be sure where this is The government It comes down to any case. This makes it difficult to build trust.
Angela Rayner’s argument Work Bill of Rights The UK’s low productivity is partly explained by insecure work. From this perspective, some measures seem reasonable: eliminating “fire and hire” practices that impose new terms and conditions on workers, helping the self-employed get paid on time, and loosening some zero-hours contracts. But the bill contains entirely other laws: the right to sick pay from day one, on parental leave and unfair dismissal, on strong union forces and others that directly contradict the growth mission that Starmer says is central.
Insecure work can be bad for productivity. But there is no work like that. The Independent Regulatory Policy Committee will review the government’s impact on the Act “Not fit for purpose.” And they warned the measures would hurt low-wage workers. Business studies suggest that the bill will accelerate activities Invest in people, not technology. The complexity and scale of the new rights means that – of course – a whole new regulator will be created to oversee them.
No 10 and the Treasury are also worried about the scarred business response to the rise in National Insurance and recent economic news. You think you’re floundering on a hiring proposal. Instead, a tenuous nine-month trial period was offered in the case of unfair dismissal.
Considering concerns over what the package could do to workers’ opportunities, only two groups stand out unequivocally to benefit: lawyers and unions. something similar b School account From the Department for Education, Secretary of State Bridget Phillipson appears to be independent, with little to do with what the rest of the government is doing.
Phillipson wants to overturn reforms introduced by Labour’s Andrew Adonis, who grew up in care, and later adopted by Conservative Michael Gove, the adopted son of a Scottish fish producer. The reforms have catapulted English schools to become the best in the world. They are based on the twin principles of creating more independent academies, such as paying better teachers more, and demanding greater accountability in league tables. Academies have become tools to transform failing schools.
Phillipson wants to sweep away much of this, without any compelling alternative philosophy on how to raise standards. Her answer to what to do about schools being “inadequate” seems to be replacing that term with something broader that doesn’t provide the same clarity to parents.
None of this makes sense. There are improvements that could be made, such as exploring multi-academic trusts. But why change a system that helps the poorest children?
When it comes to investment, a Labor majority has brought much-needed political stability. But investors need confidence in a consistent policy direction. They also need an educated and flexible labor market. Ignoring that seems unwise, to say the least.
Unlike Boris Johnson, Starmer is neither lazy nor chaotic. But like Johnson, he knows some of the worst ideas will fill the void at the center. He is known for asking for solutions, not problems, in meetings. But in Whitehall, the most elusive questions move up the system until they land on the Prime Minister’s desk. It will be difficult to drive the machine if there is no clear signal.
