HSBC has announced this morning it is buying the stricken UK arm of Silicon Valley Bank, providing a lifeline for tech firms who had feared losing access to their deposits.
The global giant emerged as a ‘white knight’ late last evening – against competition from the Bank of London and an Abu Dhabi investment fund – and this morning Mark Kleinman reported they had moved into pole position.
“This acquisition makes excellent strategic sense for our business in the UK. It strengthens our commercial banking franchise and enhances our ability to serve innovative and fast-growing firms, including in the technology and life-science sectors, in the UK and internationally,” CEO Noel Quinn said this morning.
It means that firms who banked with SVB UK will now be able to access their funds as normal.
The Bank of England said this morning that “the Bank and HMT can confirm that all depositors’ money with SVBUK is safe and secure as a result of this transaction. Silicon Valley Bank’s business will continue to be operated normally by SVBUK. All services will continue to operate as normal and customers should not notice any changes.”
HSBC will not take on any of the obligations of SVB UK’s parent bank in the US, which collapsed after a ban run.
“We welcome SVB UK’s customers to HSBC and look forward to helping them grow in the UK and around the world. SVB UK customers can continue to bank as usual, safe in the knowledge that their deposits are backed by the strength, safety and security of HSBC. We warmly welcome SVB UK colleagues to HSBC, we are excited to start working with them,” Quinn continued.
The BBC has been forced to scale back a second day of sports programming amid a deepening row over the suspension of Gary Lineker.
The corporation will air a shortened version of Match of the Day 2 without presenters or pundits after a mass walkout by BBC stars in support of Lineker.
Guy Mowbray, one of the BBC’s best-known commentators, said there would be “no normal” Match of the Day 2 on Sunday and added: “The scheduled commentary team are in full agreement with our BBC Sport colleagues. We hope that a resolution can be found ASAP.”
It came after the BBC cut back its coverage of the Women’s Super League match between Manchester United and Chelsea, and Radio 5 Live abandoned a two-hour Premier League show on Sunday afternoon.
The broadcaster is facing its most serious crisis in years after a series of high-profile presenters, commentators and pundits refused to appear on air because of Lineker’s suspension for criticising the government’s immigration policy.
The extraordinary walkout forced the BBC to drastically cut most of its weekend football coverage for the first time in recent memory. It came as:
The BBC chair, Richard Sharp, was facing growing calls to stand down over his ties to the Conservative party, as Labour and the Liberal Democrats said he was unfit to oversee the broadcaster during an impartiality crisis.
Lineker’s son, George Lineker, said his father would not apologise for his tweet comparing language used to set out the government’s immigration plans to “that used by Germany in the 30s”. He suggested his father could leave the BBC at the end of his contract in 2025.
The National Union of Journalists (NUJ) said the “whirling chaos” was increasing concern among BBC staff and inflicting “profound damage” on the broadcaster.
Mark Thompson, the former BBC director general, said Lineker appeared to have committed a “technical” breach of impartiality rules but that the tweets fell into a “grey area” and had “kidnapped” the debate away from immigration policy.
The mass walkout of BBC stars forced the corporation to axe most of the weekend’s prime-time football coverage, cancelling Football Focus and Final Score and reducing Match of the Day to a 20-minute compilation of highlights without punditry or analysis.
Viewing figures on Sunday revealed that the Match of the Day audience remained relatively unchanged from the previous weekend, at 2.6 million viewers. The BBC apologised for the truncated show.
As the furore showed no sign of abating on Sunday, Labour and the Lib Dems led calls for Sharp to step down from his role as BBC chair over his close links to the Conservative government.
Sharp is at the centre of two investigations after he admitted donating £400,000 to the Conservatives and helping to facilitate an £800,000 loan guarantee to Boris Johnson weeks before the then prime minister recommended him for the BBC role.
Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, said it was “ironic” that Sharp had been allowed to remain in post while Lineker had been suspended for criticising the government’s “stop the boats” immigration policy.
Reeves said the BBC had come under “intense pressure from Tory MPs and Tory ministers to get rid of Gary Lineker”. She told Times Radio that Sharp’s role was “pretty untenable”.
The chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, when asked on Sunday whether the BBC’s leadership was too close to the party of government, said it was not for him “to make those judgments”.
Hunt rowed back from saying Lineker should apologise for his tweets, telling Sky News’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme: “I don’t agree with his comments and I personally think that he was wrong to say what he said, but I don’t think it’s for me to decide how that issue is resolved.”
He added: “If you believe in BBC independence then it’s not for the chancellor or any other government minister to say how these issues are resolved.”
Michelle Stanistreet, the NUJ general secretary, said the crisis had rocked the corporation and left staff questioning why Sharp had “ducked for cover” instead of “battling for the BBC and its reputation”.
She said the BBC had created a “wholly unnecessary crisis” in its handling of Lineker’s tweets, and added: “This whirling chaos is creating profound damage to the BBC’s reputation, something that is causing mounting concern and frustration among journalists across the corporation. Freelance and staff journalists and presenters at the BBC have been put in a stressful and invidious position this weekend, with no sign of this crisis abating.”
Peter Salmon, a former controller of BBC One and director of sport, said the row was a “mess” and urged Davie to get a grip of the situation.
He said: “It’s complex and he’s [Lineker] a major figure. Twenty-five years in Match of the Day – he’s more than just a TV presenter, he’s a national figure. He’s got views, he’s got passions, he’s been involved in looking after Ukrainian refugees. It may be that Gary’s outgrown the job and the role in the BBC.
“Twenty-five years in – before that, Des Lynam – Gary took over, he’s been brilliant. Sometimes there’s a point at which you cross the line.”
The BBC has been forced to severely reduce a second day of sports programming amid a deepening row over the suspension of Gary Lineker.
The corporation said Match of the Day 2 and coverage of the Women’s Super League match between Manchester United and Chelsea would be “much reduced” on Sunday.
The BBC’s analysis editor Ros Atkins has tweeted a video of Gary Lineker being interviewed in 2021 about his views on the refugee crisis and BBC impartiality.
A former BBC executive has described Gary Lineker as a “brilliant” broadcaster but questioned if he has outgrown his role at the BBC.
Peter Salmon, who among his many roles was previously the controller of BBC One and director of sport, said the fallout from the impartiality row surrounding the former England footballer was a “mess” and he felt that the director general, Tim Davie, needs to get a grip of the situation.
Discussing Lineker’s role while on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Salmon said:
It’s complex and he’s a major figure. Twenty-five years in Match of the Day – he’s more than just a TV presenter, he’s a national figure.
He’s got views, he’s got passions, he’s been involved in looking after Ukrainian refugees. It may be that Gary’s outgrown the job and the role in the BBC.
Twenty-five years in, before that Des Lynam, Gary took over, he’s been brilliant. Sometimes there’s a point at which you cross the line.
Reflecting on the disruption to the BBC’s sports schedule this weekend due to pundits walking out in solidarity with Lineker, he added:
It’s a mess, isn’t it? They must be wishing they could reel back 72 hours and start all over again. It’s Oscars day but there’s no awards for how this has been managed.
I think they’ve got to take action pretty quickly. It doesn’t help the chairman of the BBC himself is slacked to one side in this process and there’s a bit of an issue. Tim Davie is isolated in some ways, he needs to come home and grip this now. We need him back running the ship.
The BBC has been forced to severely reduce a second day of sports programming amid a deepening row over the suspension of Gary Lineker.
The corporation said Match of the Day 2 and coverage of the Women’s Super League match between Manchester United and Chelsea would be “much reduced” on Sunday.
The BBC wants to “pick and choose” when its presenters can be impartial, the former England footballer John Barnes has said.
Speaking to Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday, Barnes said: “I don’t know when the BBC has ever been impartial but BBC reporting on the World Cup was anything but impartial.”
He added:
So, it seems that they want to pick and choose when they want to be partial, criticising others or criticising other countries or other political parties or other religions seems to be OK.
But, of course, if you then criticise what goes on in this country, then it seems that they will then come up with the impartiality rule.
The BBC “by and large” gets impartiality “mostly right”, Philip Hammond has said.
The former Tory MP and chancellor under Theresa May told Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday:
There’s two things struck me really in this debate. We’re in danger of confusing two separate issues. There’s the impartiality of the BBC, which is a very important principle, of course, for a public service broadcaster, and I think probably, by and large, the BBC usually gets it mostly right.
I know that because people in my party feel that the BBC is institutionally biased against it, and I know that people in the Labour party equally feel that the BBC is institutionally biased against it, so it’s probably doing something about right.
Then there’s a separate issue about whether individuals who are closely associated with large corporations can publicly express views which are highly controversial and are not the views of that corporation. I think, generally speaking, that is not acceptable.
It’s even more important when the corporation is a public body, like the BBC, or indeed the civil service. The same would be true of a senior civil servant tweeting out something that was highly controversial.
Match of the Day viewing figures were unaffected by the absence of Gary Lineker on Saturday night.
The shortened 20-minute version of the show had no commentary, presenters, or pundits after staff walked out in solidarity with its host Gary Lineker. Even the show’s theme music was dropped, as the BBC dealt with the fallout after suspending its highest-paid star.
Yet the peak audience for the shortened set of Premier League highlights was exactly the same as the previous week’s episode at 2.6 million viewers.
The previous week’s episode, before Lineker created a pan-BBC crisis by tweeting about the government’s refugee policy, had a lower average audience than the curtailed version. This is because not all viewers stayed around for the full length of the programme to watch all the matches and analysis.
The official Barb audience figures, provided by Digital-I, do not include catch-up viewing or the audience for the popular Sunday morning repeat of Match of the Day. Some viewers that who in to gawp at the spectacle of a presenter-less Match of the Day may not return in future weeks.
The corporation saw most of its football coverage taken off air on Saturday as presenters walked out in solidarity with Lineker.
The Labour MP Nadia Whittome said Gary Lineker was right to criticise the illegal migration bill.
Whittome told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme:
I think, firstly, Gary Lineker was right to call out the government’s bill and I think, yes, he works for the BBC and it’s important that the BBC is impartial, but as you say he’s a sports presenter not a news presenter, and if we’re going to talk about impartiality let’s talk about the fact that the BBC chairman donated £400,000 to the Conservative party and arranged an £800,000 loan to Boris Johnson.
What I think we mustn’t be distracted by is from the bill itself, which is what Gary Lineker was drawing attention to because the government is trying to play divide and rule, pure and simple, by criminalising asylum seekers and, in the process, risking breaking international law.
Pressed on what she thought about Lineker’s comparison with 1930s Germany, the MP said:
I think the point that he was making was about the cruelty of this bill.
When you think about the kind of wider picture with the government, you would have thought, wouldn’t you, that they’d have learned not to have picked fights with footballers after Marcus Rashford forced them to U-turn on free school meals, and now this with Gary Lineker, and now we’re all talking about the government’s cruel asylum policy.
The shadow chancellor, Rachel Reeves, has criticised Tory MPs for “putting pressure” on the BBC to take Gary Lineker off air.
She told Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme: “I wouldn’t have used the language that Gary Lineker used. But do I think he should be taken off TV from doing commentary on the football? No, I don’t. And I think that was out of proportion.”
She said Tory MPs had nothing to say when the BBC chairman, Richard Sharp, was found to have helped facilitate a loan for Boris Johnson.
Reeves added:
The people who I think are at fault here are the Conservative MPs and ministers who lined up to criticise Gary Lineker, putting pressure on the BBC to take him off air.
That is the priority now of the Conservatives – some culture war, rather than the interests and the concerns of people in their day-to-day lives. That is just all wrong.
The Conservative MP Simon Clarke said he disagrees “very profoundly” with what Gary Lineker said in the tweet that sparked the row.
Speaking on BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, Clarke said: “I disagree very profoundly with what Gary Lineker said. I think the comparisons to 1930s as he’s made are deeply inappropriate and actually very tasteless.”
Asked why it matters what a sports presenter says, the MP replied:
Mr Lineker has a huge reach and the reality is that he is obviously operating on a publicly funded broadcaster, he is someone whose platform largely derives from his role at the BBC, he’s saying things which are partisan and I think which are also deeply unfair.
He called the situation a “mess” and said the BBC needed to resolve “ambiguity” in its guidelines.
Clarke continued:
I don’t like cancel culture of any kind, I don’t like to see people being taken off air.
I think there is a slight irony here and a slight hypocrisy because obviously I wonder how many of the same people calling for Gary Lineker to be restored were calling for Jeremy Clarkson a few weeks ago to be removed.
Mark Thompson, the former director general of the BBC, has called for “calm” and said Gary Lineker technically breached the BBC’s impartiality guidelines.
Speaking to Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg, he said he hoped Lineker and the BBC could block out the “crazy noise in the papers” and find “common ground” to resolve the deepening row.
He said:
I would say on the face of it Gary Lineker’s tweet looks like a technical breach of [the] guideline but I think we’ve also got our old friend the grey area here.
In other words, no one thinks this is the same as you or Huw Edwards doing it. This is not like a news presenter basically tearing up the impartiality principles inside the kind of news machine.
The debate, and one of the reasons I think Tim Davie and others at the BBC will want to have a look at that guideline, is in social media public expectation and practice is changing all the time now.
What I would hope is both Gary, who is an outstanding broadcaster, and the BBC will both, despite the kind of crazy noise in the papers and all the rest of it, calmly take the time to look at whether there is common ground and a way forward.
Thompson was director general at the BBC between 2004 and 2012 and dealt with his own share of controversies at the network, including prank phone calls made by comedians Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand.
Asked if he thinks Richard Sharp should “decide to step aside for a while” until his links to Boris Johnson are fully investigated, he added:
The chairman of the BBC is not an operational executive … Richard Sharp is part of a governing body which doesn’t take decisions in real time.
Sir Ed Davey, the leader of the Liberal Democrats, has called for the resignation of the BBC’s chairman, Richard Sharp, to restore the perception of independence at the organisation.
Speaking on the BBC’s own Breakfast programme, Davey said the Tory government had been “undermining” the national broadcaster “over a number of years”.
He said:
The BBC is a great British institution. Its trusted news is important for our country, our democracy and also for the world and that’s why its independence is so crucial.
I’m afraid the Conservative government has been undermining the BBC over a number of years now, not least with its appointments. For example, the current chair Richard Sharp.
What we’ve seen in this Gary Lineker episode, we’ve seen 36 Conservative MPs write to the BBC essentially asking for Gary Lineker to be punished.
That was wrong … and if we’re going to draw a line and restore particularly the perception of the independence of the BBC, I think we need to take some real strong measures.
I think the chairman of the BBC, Richard Sharp, should resign.
He added that Sharp was an appointment of Boris Johnson and, as a previous Tory party donor, he helped facilitate a financial loan for the former prime minister.
Asked if Lineker was wrong to tweet political opinions in the first place, Davey said:
I wouldn’t necessarily agree with the words he chose to use but some of the sentiments behind the government’s shocking policies and the words that people like the home secretary have used, there are criticisms to be levied at the Conservatives.
The chancellor said “people’s confidence” should be restored in knowing the BBC has no “political agenda”, when he was asked about the Gary Lineker row.
Jeremy Hunt, speaking to Sophy Ridge on Sunday on Sky News, said he “personally profoundly disagrees” with the comments the TV pundit made.
But, he said, “we need to make sure that what comes out of this is that people’s confidence in the impartiality of the BBC is restored”.
He denied that the public’s confidence in this had been compromised by the dispute, adding:
The central thing that people want to know is that there isn’t any kind of political agenda in the way the BBC goes about its business, which I’m not saying there is, but that is the confidence people need to have.
Asked if he still believed the TV pundit should apologise, he added:
I don’t agree with his comments and I personally think that he was wrong to say what he said, but I don’t think it’s for me to decide how that issue is resolved.
If you believe in BBC independence, then it’s not for the chancellor or any other government minister to say how these issues are resolved.
Asked whether the corporation’s leadership was too close to the party of government, Hunt said it was not for him “to make those judgments”.
Rather predictably, the front pages of today’s newspapers focus on the ongoing dispute between Gary Lineker and the BBC, as well as the impact the row is having on the national broadcaster’s ability to cover sport.
Sunday’s Observer says the issue threatens to topple the Beeb’s top brass and could even hit the Tory government’s asylum plans.
The Sunday Mirror runs with those comments from the presenter’s son that he will “never back down”.
Meanwhile, the Sunday Times, the Sunday Telegraph and the Sunday People have all splashed on the mounting pressure on the BBC to resolve its crisis.
The Mail on Sunday reports that Rishi Sunak has “hit back” over the row, and it features a comment piece crowing that “millions must disagree” with Lineker’s immigration stance.
And finally, here are the front pages of the Sunday Express, the Independent (digital) and the Daily Star Sunday for good measure.
‘Gary Lineker’s the best in the business,” said the BBC director general, Tim Davie, on Saturday, during a hostile interview with his own organisation in which he insisted he would not resign. “That’s not for debate.”
An eerily simplified edition of Match of the Day, truncated to just 20 minutes in length, underlined his point.
Only 32 hours previously, viewers had been expecting the best football highlights programme there has ever been to appear as normal. Its host, Lineker, had been criticised by government ministers and their media outriders for tweeting that the Conservatives’ dehumanising language about refugees was reminiscent of 1930s Germany, but the storm would surely blow over soon.
When the regular MotD analyst Ian Wright posted that he had chosen not to participate in the programme in “solidarity” with Lineker, it sparked the wildest few hours on Twitter since David Cameron was accused of porking a pig. By the end of the evening, every possible replacement host and pundit had tweeted to rule themselves out of filling in, the show’s commentators had pulled out en masse, and even the players’ union had said there wouldn’t be any post-match interviews.
So it was that, the following night, with the BBC now deep in crisis, an embarrassed continuity announcer was forced to intone, “Now on BBC One, we’re sorry that we’re unable to show our normal Match of the Day … ”
Good morning. The row over Gary Lineker’s suspension reached new heights last night as the BBC was forced to scale down its TV and radio sports coverage.
The national broadcaster had to put Match of the Day (MotD) – usually fronted by Lineker – on air without presenters, pundits or the normal post-match interviews with players, many of whom came out in solidarity with him.
The show, scheduled for 80 minutes, aired for just 20 minutes on Saturday night with no commentary or analysis.
It comes as Lineker’s son said he thinks the sports presenter will return to the show – but said that he would not “back down on his word”, according to reports.
In an interview with the Sunday Mirror, the former England player’s eldest son, George, said his father had been “a bit disappointed” by the BBC asking him to step back from hosting Saturday’s MotD after he compared the language used to launch a new government asylum seeker policy to that of 1930s Germany.
George Lineker said:
Dad is a good man, a good human, and I’m proud of him for standing by his word. That’s why he was pulled off the show – because he wouldn’t apologise. But he will always speak up for people who don’t have a voice.
He is passionate about helping refugee charities – he took in two refugees who he is still in touch with and trying to help.
It means a lot to him to stand up for people whose only hope is to escape a country with only the clothes on their back. That’s why he’s been so firm.
Will he go back to Match of the Day? I think so – he loves Match of the Day. But he won’t ever back down on his word.
The government’s new asylum and migration law “amounts to cruelty without purpose” and is “immoral and inept”, the Archbishop of York has said in a powerful intervention over plans unveiled last week.
Stephen Cottrell’s condemnation came as a coalition of more than 350 charities, businesses, unions and legal groups condemned Rishi Sunak’s “cruel and unworkable” plans to detain and immediately deport those coming to the UK in small boats.
Cottrell, England’s second most senior cleric, told the Observer: “The proposals of the Illegal Migration Bill … are clearly unworkable, but will restrict access to support for many legitimate refugees and victims of modern slavery, without even the dignity of having their case heard.”
The government has promised to end the passage of small boats carrying refugees across the Channel, saying all adults will be detained for 28 days and asylum claims will be deemed “inadmissible” whatever the individual’s circumstances. They will be removed either to their own country or a “safe third country”, such as Rwanda, if that is not possible.
Cottrell said: “Nobody wants to see people risking their lives in the dangerous channel crossings but I urge the government to consider alternatives that do not unfairly penalise some of the world’s most vulnerable and which better reflect the UK’s history of compassion and moral leadership.”
The right approach to the challenge of people fleeing war and persecution was to provide safe routes, he said.
Christians were “morally bound to find ways of welcoming the stranger and feeding the hungry. This does not mean anything goes, but it does mean everyone counts. Of course, there have to be limits on the numbers of refugees and asylum seekers any one country can take. But this needs to be managed in a just, transparent and humane way. Criminalising the world’s most vulnerable people is an immoral and inept way of responding.”
Cottrell’s comments were echoed in the letter to Sunak from charities, businesses, unions and legal groups. They wrote that they were “horrified by the proposed legislation that shames this government and marks the UK as running roughshod over human rights”. Appearing to echo Gary Lineker’s criticism of home secretary Suella Braverman’s rhetoric as “not dissimilar to that used by Germany in the 30s”, the group also write that some of the language used by ministers could only “draw frightening parallels from history”.
The letter was signed by groups including Doctors of the World, Ben and Jerry’s, Unison, Friends of the Earth, Save the Children and Refugee Action. It is the clearest sign yet of widespread civil society mobilisation against the proposals.
The signatories write that the illegal immigration bill “proposes we lock up families, children and other refugees simply for asking for protection [and] fundamentally undermines this principle and makes a mockery of our international commitments”.
“It will cause misery, cost millions to the taxpayer and drive desperate people to take ever more dangerous journeys as they are left with no other route to safety,” they write. “The government boasts of our proud history of welcoming refugees, but this asylum ban does the exact opposite - it shuts the door on desperate people in need of protection. The glaring racism at the heart of the Government’s hostile refugee policy - which pulls up the ladder on refugees from Africa, the Middle East, Afghanistan and most of Asia - must be called out. The government must scrap this bill and uphold its commitment to the Refugee Convention.”
They make a stark warning about the political rhetoric being deployed about migrants. “We urge ministers to rein in their inflammatory words that all too often echo the language used by racist groups,” they write. “Dehumanising people in order to target minority and protected groups of people can only draw frightening parallels from history.”
Cottrell was not the only religious leader to speak out. Rabbi Jonathan Wittenberg, the senior rabbi of Masorti (traditional) Judaism UK, whose parents fled Nazi Germany as teenagers, said the government was “right to want to stop desperate channel crossings in unsafe boats run by extortionate smugglers with no compunction. But the way to do so is not by punishing the victims. It is by establishing safe routes for persecuted people, clearly described; by ending the hostile environment; and by establishing a just, transparent and timely way of processing asylum applications”.
Amid warnings that the proposed legislation would break the UN Charter and the European convention on human rights – both established in the wake of the Nazi Holocaust – Wittenberg said: “Jews have every reason to oppose the breach of these essential protections for the world’s weakest and most vulnerable people.”
Rabbi Charley Baginsky, chief executive of Liberal Judaism, said: “As Jews, many of us are here today because a generation before us was so desperate for safety that they put themselves and their families – or sometimes just their children – through often tortuous and dangerous journeys.
“How can we now turn around and send this generation of refugees back to face persecution, war or famine? The very nature of the UK and its immigration history will be ruptured for ever. It’s important that we see the humanity on these boats and the lives that can be saved, rather than try to deal with a problem by punishing the victims.”
Paul Butler, the Bishop of Durham, who speaks for the Church of England on refugees, said the government must not abdicate its “legal and moral responsibilities to some of the world’s most vulnerable”. The proposed legislation was “likely to push thousands of people, including children, into a prolonged legal limbo and imprisonment, and does nothing to support timely and effective consideration of asylum requests.
“It would label all those crossing the Channel as ‘illegal entrants’ and therefore people to whom we do not owe a responsibility, and would criminalise the act of claiming asylum – without acknowledging that many are highly vulnerable people escaping persecution and war, who have been left with no safe routes.”
Rose Hudson-Wilkin, the Bishop of Dover, said the bill lacked “in basic human compassion”, and was “dehumanising”.
Migration was often “the only option between life and death”. Deporting asylum-seekers without a hearing was “a brutal response given that there is currently no fit asylum application process in place here. There has to be a better way.”
Leaders from the Baptist, Methodist and United Reform churches issued a joint statement last week condemning the plans as “completely incompatible with our Christian conviction that all human beings are made in the image of God and are therefore inherently worthy of treatment which honours their dignity.”
They said: “Instead of dignity, these plans will foster discrimination and distrust, and cause immeasurable harm to people already made vulnerable by conflict and persecution. If ever there was a contemporary example of ignoring our neighbour and walking by on the other side, this is it.”
easures to boost workforce participation will target the over-50s, the long-term sick and disabled, and benefits claimants in the Chancellor’s upcoming Budget.
Tackling economic inactivity is a key component of Jeremy Hunt’s plans, as employment numbers have languished far below their pre-pandemic levels, harming the UK’s already-struggling economy.
As part of what he is billing his “back-to-work Budget”, Mr Hunt will on Wednesday announce the axing of the system used to assess eligibility for sickness benefits.
The biggest reform to the welfare system in a decade will mean claimants can continue to receive the payments after they return to employment, according to the Treasury.
The change will allow them to move into work without fear of being reassessed and losing their benefits.
The process is expected to be replaced with one that asks claimants to demonstrate what job they might be able to take, prompting disability equality charity Scope to warn that “disabled people shouldn’t be forced into unsuitable work”.
The Chancellor will also set out plans to encourage over-50s to return to work through an expansion of skills training.
The Resolution Foundation think tank recently said that while three-quarters of the rise in economic inactivity – up by 830,000 between 2019 and 2022 – was concentrated among those aged 50 and over, efforts to get pandemic retirees to “unretire” were unlikely to be successful.
Mr Hunt will detail an overhaul of the Universal Credit system aimed at encouraging claimants to move into work or increase their hours.
The Chancellor has faced pressure to act on childcare, after it was shown to be among the most expensive in the world.
He will announce a rise in the maximum universal credit childcare allowance – which has been frozen at £646-a-month per child for years – by several hundred pounds, the Treasury said, without providing the exact amount.
The Government will also start paying parents on universal credit childcare support upfront, rather than in arrears. That will help those struggling to take on a job or getting into debt under the current system due to the sky-high upfront costs.
Other measures include:
– Stricter requirements for claimants who care for children to hunt for work or take on more hours.
– An increase in the minimum earnings threshold needed to avoid regular meetings with a work coach from the equivalent of 15 to 18 hours a week. The partner of a working person will also now be required to look for a job.
– An increase in the threshold of a universal credit claimant’s earnings under which they must meet regularly with a work coach from an equivalent of 15 to 18 hours a week. Partners of working people will also be forced to seek a job.
– A ramping-up of sanctions for claimants who do not look for or take up employment.
Mr Hunt said: “For many people, there are barriers preventing them from moving into work – lack of skills, a disability or health condition, or having been out of the jobs market for an extended period of time.
“I want this back-to-work Budget to break down these barriers and help people find jobs that are right for them.
“We need to plug the skills gaps and give people the qualifications, support and incentives they need to get into work. Through this plan, we can address labour shortages, bring down inflation, and put Britain back on a path to growth.”
As firms struggle to fill more than one million job vacancies in the economy, it’s good to see the Government finding ways to support people back into the workplace
With more than half a million workers having vanished from the UK workforce since the outbreak of Covid, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak tasked Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride with reviewing issues holding back workforce participation in the autumn.
His findings are due to be published in a white paper on the day of the Budget.
Syma Cullasy-Aldridge, chief campaigns director at the Confederation of British Industry, said: “As firms struggle to fill more than one million job vacancies in the economy, it’s good to see the Government finding ways to support people back into the workplace.”
She said it was “absolutely right” that childcare support for those on universal credit will be paid upfront, but called for a review into childcare “to ensure it works for everyone”, as well as reform of the apprenticeship levy to help over-50s back into work.
The TUC said changes such as greater childcare support are “long overdue” and welcomed “an end to assessments that cause anxiety instead of helping people achieve their aspirations”.
But, the union’s general secretary Paul Nowak said proposals to increase the use of sanctions are “worrying”.
Scope’s director of strategy James Taylor said scrapping the work capability assessment “is the minimum change needed to even begin improving a welfare system that regularly fails disabled people”.
He added: “To be successful these proposals must lead to a more person-centred system that offers specialist, tailored and flexible back to work support.
“Those that want to work should be supported. But for some, that’s not an option and disabled people shouldn’t be forced into unsuitable work.”
Labour’s shadow work and pension’s secretary Jonathan Ashworth said: “Over recent months, Labour has outlined welfare reforms to get Britain back to work and now the Tories are following our lead.”
Sue, whose property was the first being taken down, said she did not expect to lose her home "so quick".
Jon Ironmonger/BBC
This video can not be played
To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Along with her neighbours, she spent the morning hurriedly packing up her belongings before the demolition teams moved in.
Sue, who did not want to give her surname, said she wished more could have been done to save her home of three years.
This time last week there was up to 20ft between her property and the cliff edge, and now there was just 3ft.
She was told she would have to get planning permission for her home to be moved back from the cliff edge but there was not enough time.
"It's really annoying, it's all your hopes and dreams collapsed into nothingness," she said.
Martin Barber/BBC
Jon Ironmonger/BBC
Mary Withey, whose home is also being demolished, said she and her partner "had got what we can".
"I'm not OK with it, it's been my home, I don't want to move... it's very sad," said Ms Withey, who has lived in her house for four years,
"When I first heard I was in shock and today I've just been tearful, it's horrible."
Jon Ironmonger/BBC
Jane Beck, head of property and asset management at Great Yarmouth Borough Council, said they planned to demolish all three properties within the day, before the next high tide at 21:38.
"It's extremely sad for those people and we're trying to do everything we possibly can to help them through that process," she said.
The beach and surrounding area at Hemsby should be avoided, she added, and she urged people to stay away for their own safety.
Martin Barber/BBC
The only access road to properties on the Marrams has also been cordoned off and is expected to collapse.
Fire crews knocked on doors on Friday and urged anybody still in the affected properties to leave their homes.
During the evening, a shed and a playhouse toppled over the cliff but Hemsby Independent Lifeboat crew managed to rescue two chickens from the shed which they said "put a smile on everyone's face".
Jon Ironmonger/BBC
Daniel Hurd, coxswain with the lifeboat crew, said it had been a "long old night".
The Highways Agency blocked off the road on Friday evening and BT responded to a telegraph pole that was tilting on the edge.
"Luckily we managed to get that on to the beach and not risk public safety by it falling on top of them," he said.
Martin Barber/BBC
This video can not be played
To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
"My concern now is that if [the erosion] gets to the car parks, we possibly may have to shut the doors on the lifeboat station and then you won't have sea cover off Hemsby at all... and that is serious," he added.
Martin Barber/BBC
Great Yarmouth Borough Council's chief executive, Sheila Oxtoby, said the authority was looking to bring some rock on to the beach to protect the road access to a number of other properties as a "temporary solution".
It is understood 1,900 tonnes of granite are due to arrive on Wednesday.
Ms Oxtoby said: "At the same time as dealing with the immediate issue, we're also looking at how we can use our emergency powers to provide a temporary rock berm solution to give us more time for the main scheme."
Jon Ironmonger/BBC
Mr Hurd, however, said the current situation was "heart-breaking" and could have been resolved earlier.
He said: "I just think it's absolutely ridiculous, this has been an emergency for years and it's taken this weekend for them to see it's an emergency to then get a rock berm put on the beach."
Borough councillor, James Bensley, said he could understand people were frustrated but there had been "so much bureaucracy".
"It's a real minefield of making sure that what local government and the authorities do is the correct line of procedure and I can totally understand people's frustrations," he said.
Martin Barber/BBC
"We [also] have to make sure it works, we have to make sure it's cost affordable and doesn't affect further south down the coast.
"I know the process and the time that has been taken is exhausting and I can fully appreciate and understand that but we have to do it correctly and with the tools that we have got and through the right channels."
Hemsby, near Great Yarmouth, is home to about 3,000 people and was once home to a Pontins holiday camp.
Last year, a 1.3km (0.8 mile) rock berm at the base of the cliff was approved in principle, but the council funding for the £15m scheme was challenging to obtain, with just £2.5m available from the government.
