Sunak, Rishi (1980- )

Latest story

138 Shares139 Views

U.K. Rail Strike May Scuttle Post-Holiday Plans to Return to Work

by

Public sympathy for striking nurses and other health workers is particularly strong, posing a challenge for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who has promised to confront trade unions.The winter holiday season across most of Britain ends on Tuesday, but the return to work for millions of Britons comes on the same day as yet another train strike, promising a commute as unpredictable as the country’s increasingly erratic rail network.Britain begins the new year just as it ended the old one, in the middle of a wave of labor unrest that has involved as many as 1.5 million workers so far, concentrated in the public sector and formerly state-owned businesses. Nurses in England, Northern Ireland and Wales walked out twice last month; ambulance crews have staged their largest work stoppage in decades; and border agents, postal staff and garbage collectors have taken similar action in a “winter of discontent.”With wages lagging galloping inflation, many, including nurses, plan to stop work again this month, leading some British news outlets to raise fears of a de facto general strike that could bring the country to a grinding halt.Yet while months of disruption have eroded some sympathy for rail workers, with the public roughly split over train strikes, support for health workers, whose tireless efforts during the coronavirus pandemic were widely lauded as heroic, remains buoyant.“January will be the test: Will the British public shift?” said Steven Fielding, an emeritus professor of political history at the University of Nottingham. He added that while further rail strikes might prompt a long-predicted backlash against the unions, “It’s remarkable how much it hasn’t happened.”Sympathy for strikes by nurses and ambulance workers has been stoked by a sense than Britain’s National Health Service is overwhelmed.Andrew Testa for The New York TimesThat is not for want of effort by Britain’s conservative tabloids. One newspaper nicknamed Mick Lynch, the combative leader of a rail union, “The Grinch,” accusing him of wrecking Christmas, spoiling office parties and hampering family reunions. In the city of Bristol, one pub canceled a rail workers’ Christmas party in retaliation for strikes thought to have hurt the hospitality trade.But in general, support for the strikers has stayed strong, according to a YouGov opinion poll last month, which showed 66 percent of respondents supported striking nurses and 28 percent opposed them, 58 favoring firefighters with 33 against, and 43 percent in favor of rail workers with 49 opposed. Another poll, by Savanta ComRes, found the same percentage in support of further rail strikes, but only 36 percent opposed.Even many Britons who support the governing Conservative Party say they believe that health workers have a case, a reflection both of the popularity of the country’s National Health Service and concerns about its ability to cope with huge pressures. And, underscoring a growing sense of malaise, another poll recorded a majority agreeing with the statement that “nothing in Britain works anymore.”That may pose a challenge for Britain’s prime minister, Rishi Sunak, who insists that agreeing to raises could embed inflation, which he sees as the real enemy of working people. Instead, he promises new, and as yet unspecified, laws to restrict labor unrest, while critics of trade unions argue rail workers are risking their futures as commuters stay away from a network already suffering from the growth of working from home.“It’s difficult for everybody because inflation is where it is, and the best way to help them and everyone else in the country is for us to get a grip and reduce inflation as quickly as possible,” Mr. Sunak told a parliamentary committee in December, when asked about the plight of striking workers.Nurses striking in London last month. A poll last month found 66 percent of respondents in favor of the strike, with 28 percent opposed.Maja Smiejkowska/ReutersNews reports suggest that an agreement to end the rolling series of rail strikes could be close, but despite holding the purse strings over the employers of rail staff, the government has resisted direct involvement in negotiations.The wave of strikes comes amid Britain’s cost-of-living crisis and follows years of constrained public spending, and unions say they are responding to a decade of neglect of vital services.“I think the fact that this comes after 10 to 12 years of austerity has affected the public mood and is maybe what’s helping the unions and their members not to lose public support,” said Peter Kellner, a polling expert. “The evidence so far is that public opinion hasn’t materially shifted. I don’t see any particular reason why it should, especially with the health service,” he added.At King’s Cross Station in London last week, there were certainly signs of annoyance among commuters at the disrupted services.“Most of the time my train is canceled or delayed,” said Daisy Smith, an airline worker from London who was waiting to travel to York, about two hours north of the capital. “It is ridiculous that they are on strike.”King’s Cross Station in London last week. Britons have long found their train service unreliable.Hollie Adams/Getty ImagesBut Ms. Smith said she sympathized with the strikers, believed they deserved a pay rise and was frustrated by the standoff. “The government needs to do something about it,” she said, adding that the dispute had been allowed to fester for months.Andrew Allonby, a public-sector worker who was traveling home to Newcastle, in northeast England, said he, too, supported the strikers.“I know there is no money around, but there has got to be a line,” he said, referring to reports that some health workers were relying on donated groceries. “Nurses having to go to food banks is ridiculous.”Public sympathy is being driven by a widespread feeling that the health system is understaffed and overwhelmed. One senior doctor made headlines by warning that as many as 500 patients a week could be dying because of long delays in emergency rooms across the country. And on Monday the vice president of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine said many emergency departments were in a state of crisis.Pay levels for nurses are recommended by an independent body whose suggestion of a 4.3 percent increase, issued before much of last year’s inflation was evident, had been accepted by the government.That is well short of the 19 percent demanded by nurses, but ministers have refused to budge, pointing to a 3 percent annual raise for nurses in 2021, when the pay of many others was frozen for the year.Britain’s health secretary, Steve Barclay, raised hackles last month by saying that striking ambulance unions had made a “conscious choice to inflict harm on patients” — a statement described by Sharon Graham, general secretary of the union Unite, as a “blatant lie.”Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has promised new laws to restrict labor unrest.Kin Cheung/Associated PressMark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, told the broadcaster Sky News, “We have had 10 years where our pay has not kept pace with inflation.” He added that 40,000 government staff members used food banks and that 45,000 of them were so poor they had to claim welfare payments.Dawn Poole, a striking border force officer at London’s Heathrow International Airport and representative of the union, said that rising food and energy costs, combined with a hike in mortgage interest rates, had been the final straw for already-struggling staff.“We have had people selling houses to downsize or struggling to pay the rent,” she said. Mr. Sunak’s tough stance is a gamble. If the strikes collapse, that could build his reputation as a leader able to stand firm and administer tough measures to stabilize the economy. It could also bolster his leadership within a fractious Conservative Party, where standing up to trade unions is associated with former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who came to power in 1979 after labor unrest also known as the winter of discontent and faced down striking miners.Mrs. Thatcher, however, prepared for her standoff with the miners, ensuring that coal stocks were high and confronting them at a time when unions were widely seen as too powerful.Inflation in Britain has been running at an annual rate of over 10 percent.Andy Rain/EPA, via ShutterstockBy contrast, today’s unions appear to be more in sync with the popular mood, analysts say, because Britons know that well before the strikes, their railways were unreliable and their health service was creaking under acute pressure.“The argument that ‘We’re on strike to save the National Health Service,’ which is what the nurses have been saying, resonates with what people know from their own experience,” said Professor Fielding.Mr. Kellner, the polling expert, said he believed that the government should separate the nurses and ambulance crews from other strikers.“As long as the health workers are on strike, the other unions have some degree of cover,” he said. “If in a month’s time we are where we are now, with nothing settled, I think the government will be in a really bad position.”In the meantime, rail travelers must decide whether to even try to head to the office this week. As one rail operator warned: “Until Jan. 8, only travel by train if absolutely necessary.” More

More stories

  • 188 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    As Soaring Prices Roil Britain, Its Leader Vacations and a Likely Successor Sidesteps the Issue

    by

    Britain is facing multiple economic shocks, from soaring energy prices to the hollowing out of the labor market by Brexit. But these issues seem disconnected from the fight to replace Boris Johnson.LONDON — The last time Britain suffered double-digit inflation, in 1982, Margaret Thatcher was prime minister, the nation was about to go to war with Argentina over the Falkland Islands, nurses and miners went on strike, and Prince William was born to Prince Charles and his wife, Princess Diana.This week, Britain is again in upheaval, with an inflation rate of 10.1 percent in July, a looming recession and a Conservative Party in the throes of a rancorous campaign to choose a new leader. If, as expected, Liz Truss is elected next month, she would take power during a period of economic stress comparable to what Thatcher confronted. And yet the multiple shocks Britain faces — from soaring energy prices because of the war in Ukraine, supply-chain disruptions after the coronavirus pandemic, and the hollowing out of the British labor market by Brexit — seem strangely disconnected from the contest to replace Prime Minister Boris Johnson.The untethered nature of the campaign is all the more striking because Britain is faring worse economically than its major European neighbors, not to mention the United States. Stagflation, another bleak relic of Thatcher’s early years, seems likely to haunt whoever succeeds Mr. Johnson.Ms. Truss, the foreign secretary, has stuck to an agenda focused on cutting taxes, which could aggravate rather than help solve those problems. Her goal is to appeal to the affluent, older Conservative Party members who choose the leader — a strategy that has helped her amass a so-far-unassailable lead over her opponent, Rishi Sunak, the former chancellor of the Exchequer. In polls of party members, Ms. Truss has an advantage over Mr. Sunak of between 22 and 38 percentage points.Liz Truss, the foreign secretary and a Conservative candidate for prime minister, campaigning last week in Cheltenham.Neil Hall/EPA, via Shutterstock“The whole campaign has been conducted in this bubble of unreality,” said Tim Bale, a professor of politics at Queen Mary, University of London. He blamed the problem in part on the news media, which he said had failed to pin down the candidates on how they would confront inflation.“There’s also a degree of fatalism about the crisis,” Mr. Bale added. “It’s put down to external events, and — by some — to the Bank of England’s tardy response.”The blinkered nature of the debate, analysts say, also reflects the peculiarities of the British political system. Only rank-and-file members of the Conservative Party can vote for the next leader, a constituency estimated at around 160,000 people. Older, whiter, and wealthier than most Britons, these voters are far less vulnerable to the ravages of a cost-of-living crisis than the broader population. To this rarefied slice of the electorate, Ms. Truss’ promise of tax cuts is more alluring than stark warnings that Britain needs to batten down the hatches before an approaching storm.Mr. Johnson, for his part, is on vacation in Greece, having skipped the chance to hold a crisis meeting with his would-be successors, as George W. Bush famously did during the presidential campaign in 2008, when he summoned Barack Obama and John McCain to the White House to discuss an emergency plan to confront the financial crisis.Pedestrians walked past shuttered retail stores on Oxford Street in central London on Tuesday.Andy Rain/EPA, via Shutterstock“It is pathetic that we have a government in which the leader is on a paid holiday, while the candidates to succeed him are just talking about pure nonsense,” said Jonathan Portes, a professor of economics and public policy at Kings College London. “The only person who seems to be thinking seriously about this is Gordon Brown.”Mr. Brown, a former Labour prime minister who led Britain’s response to the 2008 crisis, wrote recently that Mr. Johnson and the two candidates should agree on an emergency budget to cushion the blow of looming fuel price increases. Otherwise, he said, they would risk consigning “millions of vulnerable and blameless children and pensioners to a winter of dire poverty.”The inflation data, Mr. Portes said, showed that Britain was suffering from the “worst of both worlds.” It has been hit by the soaring fuel prices that have afflicted other European countries. The European Union said on Thursday that inflation in the 19 countries that use the euro rose to a record 8.9 percent in July. But it was lower in France, where the government has capped fuel prices.Britain also has the acute post-Covid labor market shortages that have plagued the United States, putting pressure on wages. In Britain’s case, those shortages have been aggravated by Brexit, which has reduced the influx of migrant workers from elsewhere in Europe.Ms. Truss has pledged aid to people who will be hard hit by the next planned increase in household fuel bills, in October, though she has refused to be drawn out on what such a package would look like. She has also raised the prospect of reviewing the anti-inflation mandate of the Bank of England, Britain’s central bank. It has come under fire in recent days for failing to act quickly enough to stem spiraling prices.Rishi Sunak, the other candidate to lead the Conservative Party, spoke during a campaign event last week in Cheltenham.Toby Melville/ReutersThe bank recently hiked interest rates sharply, and it is expected to double them again in the next six months. Yet the bank predicts that inflation will keep rising until it peaks at 13.2 percent in October, while it forecasts that a tighter money supply will plunge the economy into a recession that it says will last through 2023.Mr. Sunak also holds out the promise of lower taxes, though he argues that the government must tame inflation before it passes tax cuts. He has accused his opponent of fairy-tale economics. Ms. Truss counters that swift tax cuts will stimulate commercial activity and offer the surest path out of the economic wilderness.Economists, however, warn that cutting taxes would further strain Britain’s public services, most notably the National Health Service, which is already frayed after the pandemic.“It is hard to square the promises that both Ms. Truss and Mr. Sunak are making to cut taxes over the medium term with the absence of any specific measures to cut public spending and a presumed desire to manage the nation’s finances responsibly,” said Carl Emmerson, the deputy director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, a research organization that just published a report on the government’s deteriorating finances.On Wednesday, as the new inflation numbers were announced, Ms. Truss was in Belfast, vowing to pass legislation on trade in Northern Ireland that is likely to ignite a new round of post-Brexit tensions with the European Union.Other than its effect on Northern Ireland, the role of Brexit in Britain’s woes is also largely absent from the campaign. Both candidates are appealing to the Brexiteer wing of the Conservative Party, especially Ms. Truss, who opposed the 2016 referendum to leave the European Union, but now displays the fervor of a convert.Prime Minister Boris Johnson, left, attempted to talk to a worker who spoke no English, as he helped to pack broccoli during a visit to a farm in southwest England in June. Brexit has caused a hollowing out of the British labor market.Justin Tallis/Agence France-Presse, via Pool/Afp Via Getty ImagesIn truth, there is lively debate among economists about how much Britain’s inflation can be blamed on Brexit. Mr. Portes said it was not a key driver but has “increased pressure on the margins” by worsening labor shortages, depressing the value of the pound, and raising the costs of imports, owing to customs paperwork.Adam Posen, an American economist who once served as an external member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee, estimated in May that 80 percent of Britain’s inflation could be blamed on Brexit, mainly because of the loss of European migrant labor. This week, he stood by his aggressive claim.“Events have sadly played out about how I and others forecast,” Mr. Posen said. More

  • 88 Shares159 Views

    in Economy

    Russia-Ukraine War Is Reshaping How Europe Spends

    by

    Romania is buying iodine pills. Ireland enacted special incentives for its farmers to till essential crops. And military spending is rising across the continent.Nicolae Ciuca spent a lifetime on the battlefield before being voted in as prime minister of Romania four months ago. Yet even he did not imagine the need to spend millions of dollars for emergency production of iodine pills to help block radiation poisoning in case of a nuclear blast, or to raise military spending by 25 percent in a single year.“We never thought we’d need to go back to the Cold War and consider potassium iodine again,” Mr. Ciuca, a retired general, said through a translator at Victoria Palace, the government’s headquarters in Bucharest. “We never expected this kind of war in the 21st century.”Across the European Union and Britain, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is reshaping spending priorities and forcing governments to prepare for threats thought to have been long buried — from a flood of European refugees to the possible use of chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons by a Russian leader who may feel backed into a corner.The result is a sudden reshuffling of budgets as military spending, essentials like agriculture and energy, and humanitarian assistance are shoved to the front of the line, with other pressing needs like education and social services likely to be downgraded.The most significant shift is in military spending. Germany’s turnabout is the most dramatic, with Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s promise to raise spending above 2 percent of the country’s economic output, a level not reached in more than three decades. The pledge included an immediate injection of 100 billion euros — $113 billion — into the country’s notoriously threadbare armed forces. As Mr. Scholz put it in his speech last month: “We need planes that fly, ships that sail and soldiers who are optimally equipped.”The commitment is a watershed moment for a country that has sought to leave behind an aggressive military stance that contributed to two devastating world wars.“We never thought we’d need to go back to the Cold War and consider potassium iodine again,” said Nicolae Ciuca, prime minister of Romania.Cristian Movila for The New York TimesA wartime mind-set has also spread to sectors aside from defense. With prices soaring for oil, animal feed and fertilizer, Ireland introduced a “wartime tillage” program last week to amp up grain production, and created a National Fodder and Food Security Committee to manage threats to the food supply.Farmers will be paid up to €400 for every additional 100-acre block that is planted with a cereal crop like barley, oats or wheat. Planting additional protein crops like peas and beans will earn a €300 subsidy.“The illegal invasion in Ukraine has put our supply chains under enormous pressure,” Charlie McConalogue, the agriculture minister, said in announcing the $13.2 million package. Russia is the world’s largest supplier of wheat and with Ukraine accounts for nearly a quarter of total global exports.Spain has been running down its supplies of corn, sunflower oil and some other produce that also come from Russia and Ukraine. “We’ve got stock available, but we need to make purchases in third countries,” Luis Planas, the agriculture minister, told a parliamentary committee.Mr. Planas has asked the European Commission to ease some rules on Latin American farm imports, like genetically modified corn for animal feed from Argentina, to offset the lack of supply.Extraordinarily high energy prices have also put intense pressure on governments to cut excise taxes or approve subsidies to ease the burden on families that can’t afford to heat every room in their home or fill their car’s gas tank.Ireland reduced gasoline taxes, and approved an energy credit and a lump-sum payment for lower-income households. Germany announced tax breaks and a $330-per-person energy subsidy, which will end up costing the treasury $17.5 billion.Ireland introduced a “wartime tillage” program last week to increase grain production.Niall Carson – PA Images, via Getty ImagesIn Spain, the government agreed last week to defray the cost of gasoline in response to several days of strikes by truckers and fishermen, which left supermarkets without fresh supplies of some of their most basic items.And in Britain, a cut in fuel taxes and support for poorer households will cost $3.2 billion.The outlook is a change from October, when Rishi Sunak, Britain’s chancellor of the Exchequer, announced a budget for what he called an “economy fit for a new age of optimism,” with large increases in education, health and job training.In his latest update to Parliament, Mr. Sunak warned that “we should be prepared for the economy and public finances to worsen potentially significantly,” as the country faces the biggest drop in living standards it has ever seen.The energy tax relief was welcomed by the public, but the reduced revenues put even more pressure on governments that are already managing record high debt levels.“The problem is that some countries have quite a big chunk of legacy debt — in Italy and France, it’s over 100 percent of gross domestic product,” said Lucrezia Reichlin, an economics professor at the London Business School, referring to the huge amounts spent to respond to the pandemic. “That is something which is very much new for the economic governance of the union.” European Union rules, which were temporarily suspended in 2020 because of the coronavirus, limit government debt to 60 percent of a country’s economic output.And the demands on budgets are only increasing. European Union leaders said this month that the bill for new defense and energy spending could run as high as $2.2 trillion.The Russia-Ukraine War and the Global EconomyCard 1 of 6Rising concerns. More