There was a sentence in The Times on Feb.19: “With the tax burden running at its highest since the Second World War, there is little scope for Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, to squeeze more out of workers and businesses.”
The Labour government has long been criticized for high taxation. However, on Nov. 26, they caused the opposing Daily Mail Online to run the headline “Highest tax ever,” writing: “She is set to bring in an extra 30 billion pounds a year by 2030-2031 – including an eye-watering 12.7 billion pounds from extending the tax threshold freeze for another three years. Around a quarter of the working population will be paying higher or top rate tax by then, up from just 15% when it was imposed in 2021, as the burden reaches a new record high.”
In response, Labour’s biggest union contributor, Unite chief Sharon Graham, hit out at the government, accusing it of watering down the Employment Rights Bill and targeting "ordinary" people through stealth taxes. Graham also said Unite's 1 million members would no longer trust Labour as they faced higher taxes.
Payrolled Employment declines continued to follow throughout the year, with a 55,000 drop in April and a 109,000 drop in May. When the latter emerged, Shadow Foreign Secretary Priti Patel tweeted: “Labour governments destroy jobs and economy.” Indeed, on Nov.11, it was reported that unemployment had reached its highest rate in four years, rising from 4.8% in the three months to August to 5% in the period to September. Meanwhile, another piece of information was learned: “Wage growth is now the lowest seen since April 2022.”
The United Kingdom government's borrowing in September hit the highest level for the month in five years. It was seen that U.K. grocery inflation accelerated to 5.2% in October. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, the national debt stands at 2.8 trillion pounds but is expected to surpass 3 trillion pounds by 2026. Additionally, the interest paid will balloon from 114 billion pounds this year to 140 billion pounds, equivalent to the amount spent on education and defence.
As if the poor economic data were not enough, the revelations of what was seen as "waste" have also led to accusations of government hypocrisy. According to The Times' expose, thousands of pounds have been spent by civil servants “on meals at private members' clubs, crystal glasses like those used in Downton Abbey and sparkling wine.”
While these are not problems that originated with Labour, the government has stated it will take some measures to address them. It is clear that nothing satisfies people at this point. According to new YouGov research, only 1% of people think the government is doing a very good job on the economy, and only 13% say it's “fairly well.”
The country's deterioration since the previous government has reached such a point that commentator Peter Hitchens wrote an article on Nov. 20 with the headline: “Why I woke up this morning convinced that everyone who can leave Britain should do so ... before it's too late.” Hitchens attacked the major parties in the article, citing these taxes as one justification: “They have so completely fouled up the economy that there are no answers except politically impossible cuts and/or politically impossible taxes.”
Indeed, it appears that those who can leave are leaving. Research shows that more than a million Britons have traveled to Australia or Dubai in the last four years. These people, mostly young Britons, are posting on social media about being happier in the places they visited. Those who left temporarily and had to return are also seen expressing their sadness. It is a fact that this phenomenon, often seen as a direct “brain drain,” has worried various British broadcasters. They've reported it with distress. It seems likely that more discussion will be made about the issue in the future.
The government's tax increases will leave the richest half of households 1,000 pounds ($1,332.18) a year worse off, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. And the Chancellor defends that the wealthiest Brits must bear the burden of rebuilding Britain's "creaky" public services. So, despite views to the contrary, Labour believes it is placing the primary burden on the rich.
However, it has been alleged that Reeves lied about a 21-billion-pound black hole to justify a tax crackdown on workers, despite knowing the U.K. actually has a 4-billion-pound surplus. In fact, this appears to have gone beyond mere allegation and become the truth, as Reeves was unable to explain the issue. “The just over 4 billion pounds surplus was not enough,” Reeves said. The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) watchdog revealed it had privately told her there was no huge black hole in the nation's books. Its head, however, was forced to quit over the early release of Reeves' budget. But after that, senior officials from the watchdog said they had to "set the record straight" on what forecasts the Chancellor had been given after "unhelpful" information appeared in the media, which was seen as another blow for Reeves. This reinforced the view that there was a conflict between the OBR and Reeves and her team, that Reeves' side failed to inform the public correctly, and that the budget was prepared in a very chaotic environment. Ultimately, lying to impose taxes, the broken promises made in the past, and the fact that taxes won't only affect the wealthy don't inspire much credibility in Labour's claim. Even the veteran Labour lawmaker Graham Stringer took the preparation for the Budget had been as “chaotic and appalling.” And he predicted that both the prime minister and chancellor could be ousted next year...
Another of Labour's defensive arguments is an attempt to appear positive compared to the potentially more negative views of Nigel Farage, who currently appears to be their main rival. For example, Farage used the argument that the minimum wage is too high for young workers. Labour countered by stating that they had increased the minimum wage. Therefore, they claim to be pursuing a more beneficial policy than Farage. Farage supporters generally argued against this by citing other issues. In our opinion, both sides are projecting a very poor image on the economic issue. If Farage tries to discuss the economy, it's believed he'll mess it up.
Another argument is that lowering the cost of living, something Prime Minister Keir Starmer has particularly emphasized, is the main goal. Starmer cited an average 150-pound reduction in energy bills as an example in a Nov. 27 tweet. However, this tweet, which received 6,000 comments, mostly negative in contrast to a thousand likes, also included a note from readers: “The quoted figure of 150 pounds being saved has no basis in reality. In fact, due to Ofgem raising the energy price cap from January 2026, it's likely most British households will spend more on energy and not less.”
Labour also puts forward arguments such as how its budgetary choices will improve children's lives. However, they are repeatedly disclaimed and, due to their wrong work, it is very difficult to gain trust. In fact, all the major parties in British politics suffer from this problem. Therefore, rather than constantly trying similar models and being disappointed each time, it might be more prudent for the British people to try something different by at least looking to some political formations that stand with the oppressed Palestinian people and against the perpetrators of genocide. The increasing brain drain is also a clear indication of the need to turn to other movements.
