No 10 rejects claims Starmer received Taylor Swift tickets as "thank you" after singer got police escort Downing Street has rejected suggestions that Keir Starmer received Taylor Swift tickets as a “thank you” after she was given taxpayer-funded police security while performing in London, PA Media reports. PA says: No 10 would not say whether the prime minister was confident that perceptions of a conflict of interest had been avoided but insisted “operational decisions” were “ultimately” up to Scotland Yard and not the government. Last week it emerged that London mayor Sadiq Khan and home secretary Yvette Cooper were involved in talks around the security for Swift’s sell-out summer shows at Wembley before the singer was granted a blue-light escort. The Sun reported that she was given the motorbike convoy on the way to the stadium despite initial police reservations, with her mother Andrea Swift also negotiating arrangements directly with No 10 aide Sue Gray. Asked today whether it was the prime minister’s view that there was no perception of a conflict of interest, his official spokesperson said: “Operational decisions are for the Met. That’s the bottom line.” Downing Street cited the terror threat faced by Swift in Vienna, which had forced her to cancel gigs on the Austria leg of her Eras tour, as one of the reasons government was involved in security talks round her London shows. Senior Labour politicians including the prime minister and Cooper have accepted free tickets to the singer’s concerts, which came under intense scrutiny in recent weeks amid a row over freebies given to ministers. The PM announced he would cover the cost of around £6,000 worth of gifts and hospitality he received received since entering office following the donations backlash, as well as committing to changing ministerial hospitality to improve transparency. Among the declarations he paid back were four tickets to see Swift at Wembley Stadium which were received on 20 August from UMG, the musician’s record label. Asked whether No 10 could rule out Starmer having been given the tickets as a “thank you” after discussions between government and the force were followed by Swift getting security while in London, the spokesperson said: “I completely reject that characterisation because it’s ultimately up to the police to take operational decisions in relation to the security of these major events.” A Met Police spokesperson said: “The Met is operationally independent. Our decision-making is based on a thorough assessment of threat, risk and harm and the circumstances of each case. It is our longstanding position that we don’t comment on the specific details of protective security arrangements.” Afternoon summary Keir Starmer has twice refused to rule out a rise in employers’ national insurance contributions in the budget, stressing Labour’s manifesto promise was that it would not raise taxes on working people. British employers have warned that a rise in employer national insurance contributions in the budget could hit hiring and limit pay rises, hurting businesses including pubs, hotels and restaurants. An undercover police officer has admitted that he spied on Keir Starmer while he was a radical barrister, a public inquiry has heard. The UK Foreign Office has announced sanctions against seven organisations that support illegal Israeli settlers in the West Bank, but held back from penalising two extremist members of the Israeli government as the former foreign secretary David Cameron had been planning. Boris Johnson’s memoir, Unleashed, sold 42,528 copies in its opening week after being published on 10 October, making it the bestselling book of last week. Downing Street has rejected suggestions that Keir Starmer received Taylor Swift tickets as a “thank you” after she was given taxpayer-funded police security while performing in London. (See 1.29pm.) Campaigners urge government to launch consultation on full Lords reform, with citizens" assembly, as soon as possible Democracy campaigners have argued that the government’s House of Lords reform bill being debated today does not go far enough. In a joint statement, 10 democracy campaign groups have said that, although the bill getting rid of hereditary peers is a “laudable first step”, the government should launch a consultation on wider Lords reform as soon as possible. They say: We’re calling on the government to deliver on its manifesto promise of a proper consultation on the future of the Lords, including via a representative citizens’ assembly, to let the people decide who should be holding politicians to account and making sure laws are sensible and fair. Continuing a system of political appointees risks accusations of cronyism and conflicts of interest. We need a second chamber that makes the most of the views and experience of a much more representative group. We call on the government to announce a timeline for the public consultation on wider Lords reform, and the means for doing it effectively, as soon as possible. We believe that a citizens’ assembly as part of a national conversation would help ensure this public consultation would bring together people from all walks of life, to hear from experts, deliberate and make recommendations to be implemented by the government. The groups that have signed the statement, sent to the Guardian, are: the Democracy Network, Unlock Democracy, Involve, Citizen Network, Community Organisers, the Sortition Foundation, Independent Constitutionalists UK, 38 Degrees, Politics for the Many and Compass. In a separate move, almost 300,000 people have signed an online petition at Change.org saying the 26 Church of England bishops should be removed from the Lords. Dowden says MPs should be "cautious about rushing into change" as he opposes Labour"s hereditary peers bill Oliver Dowden, the shadow deputy PM, told MPs that the Conservatives were opposing the bill removing hereditary peers from the House of Lords because they believed in being “cautious about rushing into change”. In his speech in the second reading debate, explaining why the opposition were against the bill (see 2.07pm), Dowden said: The checks and balances of the Lords – its tried and tested conventions – work. The Lords does not claim to be a democratic chamber, and that is the key point, this elected house has primacy. Now, of course, the British constitution does and should continue to evolve, but we should only fix what is broken and be cautious about rushing into change. Our evolution should start with questions of efficacy, not optics. Just as with the Blair and Brown governments before, this government seems obsessed with change for change’s sake. We’ve seen it all before, rebranding spun to give the impression of progress. He also accused Labour of being willing to tolerate MPs getting into the Commons on the basis of family links. Now, one of the central arguments evinced by the paymaster general [Nick Thomas-Symonds, the Labour minister opening the debate] is that no one in parliament should be there by, quote, ‘an accident of birth’. Yet today’s Labour party reeks of the hereditary principle. The elevation of the nepo babies of north London, the coronation of the red princes… the Falconers, the Kinnocks, the Benns, the Eagles, the Reeves – many of them distinguished members, but under Labour’s closed shop, it’s hereditary peers out, hereditary MPs in. The Labour MPs Hamish Falconer, Stephen Kinnock and Hilary Benn are all the sons of former Labour cabinet ministers, while Angela and Maria Eagle, and Rachel and Ellie Reeves are sisters. They all became MPs by being selected in the normal way. Hereditary peers just inherit their titles when a parent, normally their father, dies. The ones who get into the House of Lords now do get elected in, by other peers, but only hereditary peers can stand, and so the competition is very limited. Dowden also said in his speech that he did not expect to remain in the shadow cabinet after the new Tory leader is elected. In his speech, Thomas-Symonds defended the bill. He said: In the 21st century there should not be places in our parliament, making our laws, reserved for those born into certain families. In fact, we are one of only two countries that still retain that hereditary element in our legislatures, a clear sign the time has come to see through this long overdue change. And it’s a matter of principle for this government, committed to fairness and equality. The Foreign Office has announced sanctions against three illegal settler outposts and four organisations that have supported and sponsored violence against communities in the West Bank. Commenting on the announcement, David Lammy, the foreign secretary, said: When I went to the West Bank earlier this year, on one of my first trips as foreign secretary, I met with Palestinians whose communities have suffered horrific violence at the hands of Israeli settlers. The inaction of the Israeli government has allowed an environment of impunity to flourish where settler violence has been allowed to increase unchecked. Settlers have shockingly even targeted schools and families with young children. Today’s measures will help bring accountability to those who have supported and perpetrated such heinous abuses of human rights. Cleaners, porters and other workers in several government departments are to strike in a dispute over pay and conditions, PA Media reports. PA says: Members of the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) will walk out for 14 days from 28 October. The workers, employed by ISS and G4S, voted overwhelmingly for strike action. The action will affect the Department for Business and Trade, the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, and the Cabinet Office, all in London. PCS general secretary Fran Heathcote said: “This escalation reflects the anger of our G4S and ISS members. They are particularly incensed by the insulting pay offers and the unacceptable fact that many receive no company sick pay.” Ex-BoE governor Mervyn King urges Reeves to ignore Labour"s "irresponsible" manifesto pledge and reverse Tories" NI cuts Rachel Reeves has been urged to abandon Labour’s manifesto promise and raise national insurance for workers in the budget – by her former boss at the Bank of England, Mervyn King. In an article for the Independent, King says that it was “reckless” for the Tories to cut national insurance before the general election, that both main parties were “irresponsible” when they said they would not reverse those cuts and that it would be best for the government to put it back up. King was governor of the Bank of England from 2003 to 2013, and in his article he recalls a conversation with Reeves at the bank when she worked there in her first job after university. Jeremy Hunt, the Conservative chancellor, cut employees’ national insurance from 12% to 10% in his autumn statement last year, and then he cut it again to 8% in his spring budget before the election. Taken together, the two cuts are worth around £18bn in the current financial year. In his article, King says: Before the general election, both major parties were irresponsible in either making, or promising not to reverse, cuts in national insurance contributions. It was a reckless increase in the future national debt – an attempt to bribe voters with their children’s and grandchildren’s pocket money. An honest approach would be to say that such a commitment now appears a mistake and to return national insurance contributions to their previous level. You might be surprised by how many citizens would accept such honesty; better to tackle the problem now and not a year or so before the next general election. King also says that he accepts the case for higher government borrowing in the short term. If you believe that the UK requires higher investment to overcome the perception that “nothing works any more” – and I do not disagree – then you should argue for the merits of that … even if it means higher borrowing for a while. Reeves has signalled that in her budget she intends to keep the government’s debt rule (that it should be falling in the fifth year of the forecast) but change the definition of debt used for this purpose. In his article, King says the rule itself should be changed. The current fiscal rule, that the ratio of debt to national income is projected to fall in the fifth year of the forecast horizon, makes little sense. It is Augustinian – make me fiscally stable… but not yet. But not even Saint Augustine believed in a five-year rolling horizon. The problem with the current rule is that it is too loose – not too tight (do read the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee report on debt published last month). Your challenge is to justify a temporary Augustinian deviation from the objective of a falling debt to national income ratio, because of the need to finance higher investment without cutting day-to-day public spending. Only a convincing and credible strategy for raising investment while achieving fiscal sustainability by the end of this parliament will help to reduce the upward pressure on long-term interest rates, resulting from higher borrowing. King ends his article by calling a conversation with Reeves at the bank. I remember your telling me one day that the reason you enjoyed working at the Bank of England was the opportunity to work with other very bright young people. Your generation is now in charge. Be courageous, be bold, and ensure that the economic inheritance we leave to our grandchildren is one of which both they and we can be proud. One day, you will look back on your time as chancellor and you will want to remember the far-reaching changes you made – not the political compromises that others will urge on you. Reeves may appreciate King’s advice, but she has repeatedly made it clear that she won’t abandon Labour’s pledge not to put up employees’ national insurance. Politicians who have to face the electorate tend to take manifesto promises more seriously than unelected officials like King. Anneliese Dodds, the development minister, told MPs this afternoon that the situation in Gaza is “truly intolerable”. In response to a Commons urgent question on Lebanon and Gaza, she said: The situation in Lebanon is worsening by the day. Civilian casualties are mounting and more than a quarter of the Lebanese population has been displaced. On the subject of humanitarian needs in Lebanon, I announced £10m of support to Lebanon to respond to the widespread lack of shelter and reduced access to water, hygiene and healthcare. This is in addition to the £5m we’ve already provided to Unicef. It’s clear that a political solution consistent with [UN security council] resolution 1701 is the only way to restore the sovereignty, territorial integrity and stability of Lebanon. This requires an immediate ceasefire between Lebanese Hezbollah and Israel now, and immediate negotiations to re-establish security and stability for the people living on either side of the Israeli-Lebanon border. While the world turns its attention to Lebanon, we must not forget the situation for the people of Gaza. They are in a truly intolerable situation currently and winter will make them increasingly vulnerable, including to communicable disease. All of Gaza’s population now faces the risk of famine. Access to basic services, safe drinking water, shelter, healthcare, is becoming harder by the day. We are gravely concerned by the situation in northern Gaza in particular – very little aid has entered northern Gaza since October 1. The UQ was tabled by the Labour MP Andy McDonald who said that repeated calls on Israel to uphold their humanitarian obligations were having “no impact” and that “recognition of Palestine is a pre-requisite for peace and not a by-product of it”. No 10 indicates it would not support new law to ban mobile phones in schools, arguing headteachers can do that already As Jessica Elgot reports, the Labour MP Josh MacAlister is introducing a private member’s bill designed to limit the extent to which under-16s can access addictive social media content on their phones. The bill has various components, and one of them would require schools in England to be mobile phone free zones. At the Downing Street lobby briefing, the PM’s spokesperson indicated that the government would not back this aspect of the bill. He said: Headteachers already have the power to ban phones in school and many have chosen to exercise this right. So we don’t have plans to legislate in that particular area. Asked if the government thought the current law on schools and phones was adequate, the spokesperson said: That is the government’s position on the question of banning phones in schools. Reeves tells cabinet government will not "turn around 14 years of decline in one year or one budget" Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, told cabinet colleagues this morning that the government could not “turn around 14 years of decline in one year or one budget”. With the budget taking place two weeks tomorrow, Keir Starmer held a political cabinet this morning (a cabinet for party political discussion, not debate on government business), and the Labour party has sent out a readout saying Reeves had a difficult message for her follow ministers. A Labour spokesperson said: The prime minister said that the first Labour budget in 14 years would prioritise stabilising the economy, fixing the foundations, and growing our way to a better Britain. He added that prioritising growth is vital to break the country out of the low growth, high tax doom loop it has been stuck in for the past 14 years. The chancellor updated the cabinet on preparations for the budget and the spending review, which she said is an opportunity to put the country on a firmer footing. The chancellor highlighted the £22bn black hole inheritance from the previous government that needed to be filled just to keep public services standing still. The chancellor said that the scale of inheritance meant there would have to be difficult decisions on spending, welfare, and tax – and that the long-term priority had to be unlocking private sector investment to drive economic growth. The chancellor told cabinet the budget would focus on putting the public finances on a strong footing and being honest with the British people about the scale of the challenge. The chancellor said the government could not turn around 14 years of decline in one year or one budget. However, the budget would deliver on the government’s priorities to protect working people, fix the NHS, and rebuild Britain. MPs debate bill to remove hereditary peers from Lords, with Tories set to vote against In the Commons MPs have just started debating the second reading of the House of Lords (hereditary peers) bill – the legislation removing the right of the remaining hereditary peers to stay in the Lords. The Conservatives are going to vote against. They have set out their reasons is an amendment that says: That this house declines to give a second reading to the House of Lords (hereditary peers) bill because it is not an acceptable or effective method of enacting major constitutional change, because it proposes a significant alteration to the composition of the House of Lords which should not be considered in isolation from other changes, having regard to the undertakings given by the then government in 1999, because it drip-feeds changes that hinder proper scrutiny of measures that could change the relationship between the two houses, because it risks unintended consequences, does not reflect the lack of political consensus on House of Lords reform and does not provide for full consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny which would give the opportunity to consider the case for overall reform, seek cross-party engagement on proposals, and review the implications of all proposals. The SNP has also tabled an amendment saying the bill should not be passed because it would be better to abolish the House of Lords altogether but, unlike the Tory amendment, this one will not be put to a vote today.