THE smoked salmon and scrambled egg charm offensive by Labour’s Shadow Chancellor has paid dividends.
Rachel Reeves’ breakfast tours of the boardrooms and banks hasn’t scared the horses, and a love-in with Maggie Thatcher has some papers even dubbing her the next Iron Lady.
Britain’s bosses are more interested in meeting Reeves than any current Treasury inhabitants, to the irritation of Tory fundraisers trying to shake the tin.
Yet her big lecture this week on her economic vision was light on details and heavy on vibes.
More growth and better relationships with business seems to be the thin plan.
And she will try to do lots of things the Government has already tried, yet found itself bogged down by Treasury tightness and regulatory hell at every turn.
Only the most extreme optimist would imagine all the problems that have left Britain with anaemic growth — like the mountain of quango-led red tape as well as rampant Nimbyism — are simply going to be magicked away by another change of Chancellor.
If reforming the planning system to build loads of houses was quick and easy — and could be done in time to have Britain chugging away with enough growth to avoid eye-watering cuts to the state — wouldn’t someone have done it already?
It was all slightly pie in the sky, but it’s not as if the Tories or any one else has any better ideas right now.
But are Labour actually about to make things even harder for business to get growth going gangbusters? Amid all the love-ins with CEOs and glowing write-ups, there’s a rumble of concern growing about Labour’s heavy-handed plans for expanding workers’ rights.
One of the few things this country has going for it right now is a competitive jobs market.
It’s why so many people want to come here, and come here they do.
It is not exactly clear what Labour’s “new deal for workers” will entail as business groups are currently negotiating with Reeves over it, amid hints it will all get watered down.
Labour will ban zero-hours contracts and contracts without a minimum number of guaranteed hours — which sounds good until the price of your deliveries soar
But the original plan championed by union darling Angela Rayner pledged dozens of new restrictions on business.
Another mountain of very red tape.
Workers will get protection from “unfair dismissal”, along with “sick pay and parental leave . . . from day one”, with lots of that extended to the self-employed somehow.
While it all sounds nice, surely the last thing the country needs is more regulation?
“Labour will ban zero-hours contracts and contracts without a minimum number of guaranteed hours” — which sounds good until the price of your deliveries soar.
Lots of people like flexible working, and yes, protection for those that are exploited is needed, but a blanket ban seems extremely over the top.
And my favourite one is Labour’s plan to legislate to make our workforce extremely French, with a new legal “right to switch off” so working from home does not become homes turning into 24/7 offices.
Say goodbye to limited protections we currently have against being held hostage by a minority of militant train drivers.
Apparently, “workers will have a new right to disconnect . . . and not be contacted by their employer outside of working hours”, which completely disregards the notion that some people might actually care about the job they do and the company they work for and step up in a time of crisis.
Equalities officers will be given legally protected time off to fight woke battles, and union officials will be given far more powers to help organise strikes on the clock. You get the picture.
To no surprise, it’s only the trade unions cheering loudly for these proposals, not least because Labour have vowed to tear up anti-strike legislation passed by the Tories.
Say goodbye to limited protections we currently have against being held hostage by a minority of militant train drivers.
And say hello to a sweeping expansion of the Equalities Act that is also planned.
The current Business Secretary, Kemi Badenoch, has warned it will “set people against each other” and create a “bonanza for activist lawyers”.
The problem with hiking the mandatory wages too high, too quickly, is smaller firms simply cannot afford it.
Add to that Labour’s pledge to dramatically increase the Living Wage somehow, and you can see why businesses are concerned.
The problem with hiking the mandatory wages too high, too quickly, is smaller firms simply cannot afford it.
At best, they don’t expand, so there goes all that growth.
At worst, they start laying people off and that competitive jobs market starts to evaporate.
If Reeves really is going to be the new Iron Lady, an early battle she has to win is against her own comrade Angie.
Reeves’ plan to avoid cuts needs growth. Rayner’s union-dictated wish list is a recipe for stagnation.
THE Russians must be wetting themselves laughing that one slightly pious story from The Guardian is enough to have the head of MI6, Richard Moore, launch a public round of self-flogging about being a member of a posh gentlemen’s club that doesn’t let in women.
Funny the ultra-woke “C” was fine with his membership of the Garrick before it went public, swiftly resigning after. As was former Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger.
But Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, must feel slightly aggrieved he’s had to rescind his membership, too.
His predecessor, Sir Mark Sedwill, used to be chauffeur-driven the one-mile journey from No10 to the Covent Garden haunt in a taxpayer-funded limo – and no one seemed to mind then.
THE Easter holidays can’t come soon enough for Downing Street after a brutal few weeks of plots and panic.
While Jeremy Hunt accidentally let slip what you’ve read in The Sun for weeks – that the election is planned for October – other Cabinet ministers are not sure the show can be kept on the road that long. With May 2’s local elections expected to be a bloodbath, some of those closest to Sunak think it’s inevitable the dreaded 54 letters calling for a vote of no confidence go in the week after.
To avoid that humiliation, there are whispers of “a worst case scenario” if the plotting continues. That would be to call an election at the end of April for a polling day in June.
While the pain of the local elections would fall early in the campaign, when the Tories did incredibly well in similar polls in 2017 – when Theresa May was flying high – it actually helped Labour get a foothold in that General Election campaign.
Punters weren’t sure about May, and those results crystallised the fact she was on course for a landslide. It let Labour sow doubt on the doorstep and helped lead to a hung parliament.
Could the same tactic be played back on Starmer? Some think so. But if that sounds desperate, it’s because it is.
Desperate times call for desperate measures . . .
