Home News

Labour has expressed confidence that enough raw materials can be secured to keep British Steel’s blast furnaces running after the government seized operational control from its Chinese owners.Ministers said British Steel’s owners, China’s Jingye Group, had wanted to shut the furnaces at the Scunthorpe plant after they rejected a government funding proposal, which would have forced Britain to import steel instead.The government recalled parliament at the weekend – the first Saturday recall since the 1982 Falklands War – to give it powers to direct the company’s board and workforce and order raw materials.Jingye has not commented, but China called for fair treatment of its companies and resolution through consultation.Experts say the dispute has risked straining ties between London and Beijing, which Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government had sought to improve. The talks also come at a time when nations around the world are trying to deepen trading cooperation after the US tariff shock.British Steel needs to secure raw materials for its blast furnaces to prevent its Scunthorpe facility from shutting down irrevocably (Danny Lawson/PA) More

A month-long strike by refuse workers in Birmingham has left the city grappling with mounting piles of rubbish, growing public health concerns, and a deepening political divide over who is to blame.What began as a dispute over pay cuts has now escalated into a full-blown crisis, with the government deploying military planners to help manage the city’s waste collection efforts. Meanwhile, residents report rats the size of cats, an overwhelming stench in the streets, and a lack of clarity on when the situation will end.With a new ballot on a potential deal due this week, tensions between Birmingham City Council, the Unite union, and national government continue to rise – and now, public opinion is beginning to harden.Some residents back the striking workers, arguing they’re fighting for fair treatment and decent pay, especially after claims that some face losses of up to £8,000 a year. Others are fed up with the disruption and question whether essential services should ever be used as bargaining chips.Debate is also raging over whether the army’s involvement is a step too far, or a necessary measure to protect public health. And as waste collection services across the UK face similar pressures, bigger questions are being asked about privatisation, council budgets, and whether our current model of public service delivery is still fit for purpose.So, what’s your view? Do you support the bin workers’ strike, or do you think it’s gone too far? Should councils be allowed to outsource these services, or is it time to bring them back in-house? And would you accept a different waste model – or even a rise in council tax – if it meant avoiding scenes like this in the future?We want to hear from you. Vote in our poll and share your thoughts in the comments – we’ll feature the most compelling responses and discuss the results in the coming days.All you have to do is sign up and register your details – then you can take part in the debate. You can also sign up by clicking ‘log in’ on the top right-hand corner of the screen. More

The UK economy grew by 0.5 per cent in February in a boost to Labour following several months of almost flatlining, with the Office for National Statistics (ONS) pointing to “widespread growth” across multiple sectors.In January, an unexpected 0.1 per cent decline was initially reported before the ONS revised its estimates to a flat month, following just 0.1 per cent growth in the final quarter of 2024 – so February’s change of gears will be welcome news to Rachel Reeves.Commenting on Friday’s GDP figures for February, ONS director of economic statistics Liz McKeown said: “The economy grew strongly in February with widespread growth across both services and manufacturing industries.“Within services, computer programming, telecoms and car dealerships all had strong months, while in manufacturing, electronics and pharmaceuticals led the way and car manufacturing also picked up after its recent poor performance.“Across the last three months as a whole, the economy also grew strongly with broad-based growth across services industries.”Speaking about the data, chancellor Rachel Reeves acknowledged that the positivity would be tinged with more immediate concerns over tariffs and potential trade wars following a wild week in the stock markets.“These growth figures are an encouraging sign, but we are not complacent. We must keep going further and faster on our Plan for Change,” Ms Reeves said.“The world has changed, and we have witnessed that change in recent weeks. I know this is an anxious time for families who are worried about the cost of living and British businesses who are worried about what this change means for them. This government will remain pragmatic and cool-headed as we seek to secure the best deal with the United States that is in our national interest. At the same time, we will be relentless in our work to kickstart economic growth, provide security for working people and renewal for Britain.”Rachel Reeves acknowledged the positivity would be tinged with more immediate concerns over Donald Trump’s tariffs More

Prime minister Keir Starmer has refused to say if he will let MPs see evidence that Labour’s welfare reforms will help more people into work before they are expected to vote the controversial measures through.Entitled the ‘Pathways to Work’ green paper, the policy package will make £4.8 billion in cuts to spending on health and disability benefits. The changes aim primarily to support more people into work, Labour says, alongside bringing down Britain’s spiralling benefits bill and reducing youth inactivity.However, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) said last month that it could not yet provide any evidence that Labour’s reforms would help more people into work.This was because it had not been provided with this analysis by the government, it said, adding that it was also unable to make its own in the limited time available.Sir Keir refused to make ‘timetabling’ commitments over evidence welfare reforms would help people into work More

“Suddenly I felt like everything I’d ever worked for had crashed around me, suddenly I was losing everything,” says Grace Carter. “The idea of losing my business felt like losing a baby. “I really, really struggled.”After trying for years to have a second child, the 33-year-old was overjoyed when she gave birth to her daughter in November 2023.However, she tells The Independent, she was left feeling suicidal as a result of the financial strain of having a baby and is still in a huge amount of debt after trying to keep her business as well as her young family afloat.Ms Carter, from Colchester, has since joined calls for maternity pay to match the national living wage, and is demanding that the “economic contribution of mothers is appropriately recognised and compensated”.She said she received Statutory Maternity Pay (SMP), which works out at the equivalent of a full-time worker on a 37.5 hour week earning around £4.99 per hour after the first six weeks of maternity leave. This is roughly just 41 per cent of the 2025 national living wage (NLW) of £12.21 per hour, which has been set out to ensure a basic standard of living.Ms Carter – who is the founder of The Metamorphose Group, a collective of purpose-driven brands aimed at changing the lives of women and girls, which she has been building over eight years – said the combined effects of her being out of work, as the head of her company, and the discrimination she faced led to her business’ yearly turnover shrinking to almost half, from an average of £600,000 to £350,000 that year, and she was forced to borrow £140,000.The mother-of-two – who has had five miscarriages and whose daughters are now aged five and one – has founded the End Parenting Poverty campaign More

Labour’s recently announced cuts to welfare spending may be much more severe than the government is claiming, several experts have warned. The headline £4.8bn figure placed on the cuts conceal their ‘true scale’, new analysis argues, as ministers continue to rebut criticism of the measures.The reforms, which largely focused on health and disability benefits, were announced by work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall on 18 March. The following week, chancellor Rachel Reeves revealed the scale of these cuts to be £4.8bn at Labour’s spring statement – as independently assessed by the Office for Budget Responsiblity (OBR).Announcing the plans, Ms Reeves said: “The Labour Party is the party of work. We believe that if you can work, you should work. But if you can’t work, you should be properly supported.”But a new report from the New Economics Foundation (NEF) has found that around £2bn in cuts has gone unstated due to how the OBR has costed the proposals. In its forecast, the spending watchdog takes £1.6bn away from the headline cuts figure to reflect Labour’s decision not to continue Conservative proposals to reform the Work Capability Assessment (WCA).Chancellor Rachel Reeves delivering her spring statement in the Commons (House of Commons) More

As Donald Trump prepares to unveil the latest round of US tariffs – grandly dubbed “Liberation Day” by the White House – the uncertainty surrounding their impact is growing. While Trump has hinted that all nations, including the UK, will be affected, the specifics remain unclear. What is certain, however, is that his trade war will have far-reaching consequences for global markets, businesses, and consumers.The topic has got Independent readers talking, with many sharing their views on Trump’s tariffs.Across our community, there is deep concern that these tariffs will drive up prices in the UK, worsen the cost-of-living crisis, and further destabilise an already fragile economy. Some argued that instead of scrambling to avoid tariffs, UK leaders should focus on making US tech giants pay their fair share of tax. Others pointed out historical warnings in America’s own past, drawing parallels to the devastating effects of the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariffs.However, a few suggested that the UK could find opportunity amid the chaos – if it plays its cards right. They argued that Redirected trade flows might benefit certain industries, while economic shifts could ease borrowing costs for the government. Whether the UK emerges from this as a loser or a winner will depend on the political and economic decisions made in the coming weeks.Below is a selection of your views on Trump’s tariffs. Feel free to share your own thoughts in the comments section by clicking here.Resisting bullyingStarmer ‘offers US tech firms tax cut’ in last-ditch bid to dodge Trump tariffs.This is diametrically opposed to the position he should be taking.US tech firms already do not pay a fair share of tax on the revenue they generate here. We should be seeking to make them so, regardless of tariffs, but especially so given that tariffs have been imposed.Furthermore, Starmer should not be seeking to wheedle out of tariffs, he should be aligning with the rest of the world to resist Trump’s bullying. Jolly SwagmanRocketing cost of livingMy Limited Capability for Work and Work-Related Activity/Universal Credit… that 1.7 per cent increase, approx £12 per month, which won’t even cover the 29 per cent rise on my water bill, let alone gas/electric, council tax, water, TV licence and mobile/broadband increases.It’s absolutely pitiful in comparison to the rocketing rises of the costs of living on all fronts, and that goes for everyone who isn’t well off or wealthy.And now we have to wait and see the impact of Trump’s tariffs on an already ailing economy and a decimated UK population! It never seems to stop! RedRocket68Support for UK industriesWell, Trump is right in one respect. We need to support our own industries, something successive governments since Thatcher have failed to do.But tariffs are not the way, as they only raise prices for all consumers. Tax is a better option, and raising the digital services tax on Tech Bros who can well afford to pay would raise much-needed revenue.Let our government stand up for British interests for once. Time for the British lion to stop rolling over to have its tummy rubbed like a domestic moggy. Time for the British Lion to show its claws. 49ninerHistory lessonAmerica has been here before with the Smoot-Hawley tariffs of 1930, and it’s difficult to comprehend why they think this time will be any different. All it did was drive inflation, unemployment, and prolong the Great Depression in America. The damage to global trade, instability, and animosity no doubt contributed to the outbreak of the Second World War. fruitpicker15Tariffs benefit no oneThere are no winners with tariffs. The biggest losers are the consumers in the country imposing extra domestic taxes.Trump was elected to lower the price of eggs, not increase the price of automobiles. LordNelson3Trump’s re-electionFrom what we are hearing about the planned increases in import tariffs, Trump might actually destroy his own chances of ever being re-elected. American consumers will be hit by them as well as those elsewhere. Disillusion with Trump will be a more effective way of restoring democracy because the likes of Vance and any other strong supporters of Trump will become just as unelectable.InterestedObserverBritish alternativesIt would be smart not to raise tariffs against America; they only increase prices in the UK. If they want to tax US citizens to buy our products, then that is up to them, we can’t control what they do, but there is no point fighting back by damaging ourselves. I would, however, be harsher on their tech companies in terms of an age validation requirement for adult content, the need to stop harmful content and increase the tax on the companies themselves. Let’s ensure people can have cheap or free access to social media and email, etc., in the UK without the need to access American companies. Let’s ensure there is a British alternative to Amazon. Everyone needs to stop buying American goods and services and seek UK or EU alternatives. PeterHenleyWhy target only economic reprisals?Why is the UK Government restricting their consideration of reprisals against POTUS to economic ones? There are 13 USAF bases in the UK which appear to have no immediate benefit for this country. Simply say that as long as the tariffs continue, no USAF planes will be allowed to land here or overfly UK airspace. There may be UK bases abroad too that are used by the USAF. If Canada and the EU also imposed restrictions, the US “Reach” worldwide would be much diminished. We could also think about adding restrictions to commercial air flights if they provide no benefit to the UK. sweepydogRisks of retaliationIt will very often be the case that the party imposing tariffs, in this case the US, is the biggest loser. A corollary is that retaliation, however tempting, is not necessarily the best policy. Why shoot ourselves in the foot just because Trump has?That said, some carefully selected responses, e.g. targeting the products of Trump-supporting states, might be worth considering politically speaking. Prester JohnImpact of sanctions and tariffsI am not convinced that putting sanctions or tariffs on Russian oil will help the US at all… India and China will just continue to trade oil across the border directly in Yuan. In fact, it will help them to get cheaper oil than the rest of the world… However, the Chinese also hold so much in American T-bills that if things get nasty they will start selling (and not buying)… yields will quickly rise… then there go interest payments. Ok if you’re cash-rich… not so good for middle and working classes with any debt exposure… house owners, students, small businesses, employees… etc… this could all go wobbly pudding… IndysouthwestThe Great DepressionIn response to the Smoot-Hawley Tariffs Act signed into law by President Hoover in 1930, tariffs imposed by U.S.’s trading partners in retaliation, along with the act’s direct effects, were major factors in the reduction of American exports and imports by 67% during the Great Depression.We should remember that, along with the U.S. itself, Germany was among the worst affected at the time, and that this was a significant factor in the rise of fascism.This time, fascism appears to be a driving force. RocketoftheNorthTrade diversions due to Trump’s tariffsTrump tariffs offer the UK a potential fortune through trade diversions, expert suggests….Professor Jun Du, of the Aston Business School, said: “The picture for tariff measures may not be clear at the moment, but what is clear is that economies like the UK need to plan for various eventualities and start to put mitigating measures in place.“US tariffs offer the UK a potential fortune through trade diversions, yet these gains could complicate efforts to reset UK–EU relations, amplifying economic divergence, political distrust, and misalignment.”I never thought I’d agree with Gove – but there is one “expert” we can do without. Do they not understand that if the UK acted as a diverter into the EU, they would not get a fortune, they would be crucified by the EU27 and put in the same box with Trump. ArcticFoxEconomic impactIf Trump’s tariffs lead to fears of global recession, then that will cause interest rates to fall. That restores Reeves’s “fiscal headroom” because borrowing costs will fall and slightly ease cost of living issues. Also, any retaliatory tariffs we impose will bring in revenue.I’m not saying any of this is good, but just that it doesn’t automatically ruin the government’s financial plans. Also, if Labour can’t get growth going (and they seem to have no idea how to do this), the next best thing is to have someone else to blame for the lack of growth.Chrisw27Some of the comments have been edited for this article for brevity and clarity. Want to share your views? Simply register your details below. Once registered, you can comment on the day’s top stories for a chance to be featured. Alternatively, click ‘log in’ or ‘register’ in the top right corner to sign in or sign up.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

The number of children living in poverty across the UK has reached a new record high, according to figures from the Department for Work and Pensions.Some 4.45m children were estimated to be in households in relative low income, after housing costs, in the year to March 2024.This is up from the previous record of 4.33m in the 12 months to March 2023. It is the highest figure since comparable records for the UK began in 2002-2003.A household is considered to be in relative poverty if it is below 60 per cent of the median income after housing costs.Anti-poverty campaigner Alison Garnham said the data was a “stark warning” that government action is needed, adding that record high numbers of children in poverty “isn’t the change people voted for”.115,000 more children are living in poverty compared to 2023, according to government figures More