Keir Starmer has £28billion problem – Ed Miliband won’t like solution | Personal Finance | Finance
Keir Starmer is under fire on every front. Spending is out of control, debt is rising and the country is in a filthy mood. So is his own party. MPs who wouldn’t have a job without Starmer’s landslide want him out. Next week brings the Makerfield by-election. If leadership pretender Andy Burnham wins as expected, Starmer will be plunged into a battle for his own job. At the same time, he has to keep running the country. Or at least try.
When you’re Prime Minister, big decisions arrive every day. One reason Starmer is struggling is because he’s so bad at making them. That’s particularly true when it comes to funding our military. Whitehall moves at the speed of a First World War tank at the best of times. On defence, it’s stuck in the mud. Starmer needs to find an estimated £28billion to boost our defences against Vladimir Putin, but there’s a problem. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has blown the lot. But one senior cabinet minister does happen to be sitting on a mountain of cash. His name is Ed Miliband.
The Energy Secretary is guarding a £63billion war chest. He’s using it to accelerate his Net Zero mission to turn UK electricity production green by 2030. And he’s chucking the cash around.
This includes throwing £22billion at expensive and unproven carbon capture and storage techology. He’s also been handed £8.3billion to set up Great British Energy, a vanity project without a purpose. Then there’s £15billion for his Warm Homes Plan, which has yet to make any homes warmer, and £11.6billion for international climate projects with little or no benefit to us.
Another £11billion is earmarked for the National Wealth Fund, to support green industries selected by ministers. Whitehall is disastrous at picking winners so most of that will be squandered.
On top of all that, Miliband is handing Drax power station £4billion in subsidies to burn imported wood pellets, and paying wind farms £1.5billlion a year not to generate electricity. How can Labour justify spending such vast sums on projects with uncertain returns when Britain faces its biggest security threat in decades? Starmer is finally asking the same question. And well he might.
The PM is already frustrated by Miliband’s determination to block new North Sea oil and gas developments, a frustration shared by Rachel Reeves. He tried to sack Miliband last year but lacked the political firepower. Red Ed is far more popular with Labour MPs and activists.
He should renew the assault, and has another motive for doing so. Miliband is said to be egging on Burnham’s leadership bid, right under Starmer’s nose. He should gun down Red Ed for that betrayal alone.
Starmer still believes he can survive. He reckons a three-month leadership contest would expose Andy Burnham as a lightweight (it takes most people three minutes). But Starmer needs to show some backbone first.
A good start would be to sack Miliband, redirect part of his Net Zero budget into guns and ammo, and open up the North Sea. That would show the PM is willing to make tough decisions. It’s time Starmer took defence seriously – by battling to save both Britain and his own job.
