What is the UK’s two-child cap on benefits and will Labour reverse it …
(Today) Starmer has previously opposed abolishing the cap, arguing that, given the country’s poor financial condition, it could ill afford the estimated 3 billion pounds ($3.87bn) a year abolishing the …
Yes I see the man’s point. Where oh where could the money come from, I wonder?
Keir Starmer: ‘Essential’ for Nato allies to increase defence spending
The Prime Minister has committed to spending 2.5% of gross domestic product on defence but he has not set a timetable to reach that goal.
Nato members are meant to spend at least 2% on defence…
…
Before his election defeat, Rishi Sunak had committed to reach 2.5% by 2030 at a cost of £75 billion over six years.
But Sir Keir hit out at this “arbitrary” deadline.
…
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/keir-starmer-essential-for-nato-allies-to-increase-defence-spending/ar-BB1pPqnN
Wots £12.5 bn minus £3 bn then…
Labour are the same as the Tories on defence and Kid Starving, it seems.
Just heard some weaselly Labour MP on BBC radio explaining that he cares passionately about this issue as he grew up in a family on benefits. It’s just that we need to look carefully at the books to see where the money can come from.
The interviewer did ask why then there was no timescale.
Pity he didn’t ‘think’ to ask could it not come from this £75bn present to Nato and US hawks.
As for human rights and the right to life (there’s also human rights of the child laws) - the subject of the previous news story - the BBC knows not to go there, or Sir Keir would be very cross.