Farage and Reform UK treasurer Nick Candy say they’ve met Elon Musk to discuss doing ‘great things together’
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, and Nick Candy, his new party treasurer, have met Elon Musk at Donald Trump’s Florida home, Mar-a-Lago, the party has announced.
It has not said much about what Farage and Candy discussed with the world’s richest man, but the news will revive speculation that Musk is planning a significant intervention that could help Reform UK’s electoral prospects.
Musk denied a recent report saying he was planning to give the party $100m. But doubtless Farage would be happy to accept a smaller sum, and, because Musk has business interests in Britain, UK laws intended to prevent foreign interference in domestic politics might not get in his way. Musk also owns X, and was accused of using it during the US presidential election to help Donald Trump.
In a statement after the meeting, Farage and Candy said:
We had a great meeting with Elon Musk for an hour yesterday. We learned a great deal about the Trump ground game and will have ongoing discussions on other areas.
We only have one more chance left to save the west and we can do great things together.
Our thanks also to President Trump for allowing us to use Mar-a-Lago for this historic meeting. The special relationship is alive and well.
Farage posted this picture from the meeting on social media.
Key events
The Green party has also condemned the government’s decision not to pay compensation to the Waspi women. The Green MP Siân Berry has put out this statement.
This is a very harsh decision, admitting wrongdoing but offering a bitter dose of nothing to a generation of women, caught out by this, who faced so many hurdles and prejudices in respect of their careers and earnings …
The government should reconsider this decision and look at how it can also do more to help women born in the 1950s win the same security in retirement as enjoyed by their male counterparts.
Scottish government ministers to be banned from using WhatsApp for official business
Severin Carrell
The Scottish government is to ban the use of WhatsApp and other messaging services for its official business, after scathing criticism of its use and mass message deletion by ministers and officials during the Covid crisis.
Nicola Sturgeon, the then first minister, and other senior officials including Jason Leitch, the then national clinical director, were accused of covering-up their mishandling of the crisis by routinely deleting WhatsApp messages.
UK ministers, including Boris Johnson, the then prime minister, also faced intense criticism for their wholesale use of WhatsApp and over Johnson’s missing messages – blamed on a change of handset and unspecified technical issues.
Kate Forbes, the deputy first minister, said the ban would take effect in spring 2025 in a bid to restore public confidence in transparency and accountability, and hinted she expected the UK Covid inquiry to soon issue highly critical findings about the past practice.
She told Jamie Greene, for the Scottish Conservatives, that access to non-official messaging services would be blocked on all government-issued mobile devices, in the same TikTok is currently barred from official phones.
Greene said Forbes was being “very naïve” if she thought ministers and officials would not use messaging apps on their personal phones to avoid scrutiny. Forbes said that would be a breach of the rules. She told MSPs:
This decision aligns secure, open, transparent governance, underpinned by sound records management policy and practice and the wellbeing of staff, with the values and vision of the Scottish government.
Before she spoke, Greene tabled a point of order because Forbes had failed to circulate an independent report on the controversy to MSPs so they could read it before her statement. Ironically, he said, Forbes was not being transparent on a statement about transparency.
Labour MPs have been among those criticising the government’s decision not to pay compensation to the Waspi women. (See 1.07pm.)
In the Commons Brian Leishman, MP for Alloa and Grangemouth, said he was “appalled” by the announcement.
I have campaigned with Waspi women, as have many parliamentary colleagues, and this is an incredible let down. Waspi women, in my opinion, certainly do not need words of disappointment and they certainly do not need hollow statements. What they need is justice.
Gareth Snell, MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central, said this was a “sad moment”, and that he had previously campaigned for a “fair transition” for Waspi women.
Melanie Onn, MP for Great Grimsby and Cleethorpes, said she did not accept Liz Kendall’s argument that earlier notification would not have made much difference. (See 1.33pm.)
[Kendall] says this report is about the way that it was communicated to those 1950s-born women and earlier letters would not have made a difference.
But I say they would have made a difference, they would have made a difference when it comes to individuals’ financial planning, in their retirement dates and notice they were giving to their jobs, from their wider family arrangements and commitments that they made.
‘It is better to engage’ – Starmer defends decision to seek better relations with China, despite spying claims
A lawyer who was accused of improperly trying to influence MPs and peers on behalf of China has lost a legal challenge against MI5, who said nearly three years ago that she was trying to interfere in the British democratic processs, Dan Sabbagh reports.
The investigatory powers tribunal in this case came out only a day after a court lifted the ban on naming a businessman accused of “spying” for China when he befriended Prince Andrew.
Speaking to broadcasters in Estonia, asked if he was considering his decision to seek a closer relationship with China, Keir Starmer said:
We have to be alert to the risks and challenges of China and we are alert.
But we do have a strategy of engagement and that means where we co-operate on important issues like climate, we must do so.
But we must also challenge, and we do on important issues like human rights, with frank discussions, as I have had on a number of occasions, and of course compete when it comes to trade.
But it is better to engage whilst making sure we are clear about the threats and challenges that China poses.
Farage and Reform UK treasurer Nick Candy say they’ve met Elon Musk to discuss doing ‘great things together’
Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, and Nick Candy, his new party treasurer, have met Elon Musk at Donald Trump’s Florida home, Mar-a-Lago, the party has announced.
It has not said much about what Farage and Candy discussed with the world’s richest man, but the news will revive speculation that Musk is planning a significant intervention that could help Reform UK’s electoral prospects.
Musk denied a recent report saying he was planning to give the party $100m. But doubtless Farage would be happy to accept a smaller sum, and, because Musk has business interests in Britain, UK laws intended to prevent foreign interference in domestic politics might not get in his way. Musk also owns X, and was accused of using it during the US presidential election to help Donald Trump.
In a statement after the meeting, Farage and Candy said:
We had a great meeting with Elon Musk for an hour yesterday. We learned a great deal about the Trump ground game and will have ongoing discussions on other areas.
We only have one more chance left to save the west and we can do great things together.
Our thanks also to President Trump for allowing us to use Mar-a-Lago for this historic meeting. The special relationship is alive and well.
Farage posted this picture from the meeting on social media.
The opposition parties that were not likely to be in government after the general election were notably more keen to say the ombudsman’s recommendations on Waspi women should be implemented in full, when they were first published, than the official opposition, or indeed the party in office at the time. And that is still the case today.
The Liberal Democrats said today was “a day of shame” for Labour. Steve Darling, the Lib Dem DWP spokesperson, said:
Today is a day of shame for the government.
The new government has turned its back on millions of pension-age women who were wronged through no fault of their own, ignoring the independent ombudsman’s recommendations, and that is frankly disgraceful.
The Conservative party left our economy in a shambles, but asking wronged pensioners to pay the price of their mismanagement is simply wrong.
For years, Liberal Democrats have pushed the government to fairly compensate Waspi women in line with the ombudsman’s recommendations.
And Kirsty Blackman, the SNP’s DWP spokesperson, said:
This Labour government announcement is a devastating betrayal of the millions of Waspi women who have spent years campaigning for justice.
Having been let down for so many years by successive Tory governments there was a sense that Labour might finally live up to their promise of ‘Change’, but instead Labour has confirmed that they will betray those women and pull yet another shady Westminster trick.For years Labour politicians, including Anas Sarwar [the Scottish Labour leader], backed the Waspi campaign and promised to help deliver justice – now in just their first year in power, they turned their back on millions of affected women.
In the chamber it was put to Liz Kendall, the work and pensions secretary, that she too had backed the campaign by Waspi women for compensation and that Labour had promised compensation in the 2017 and 2019 election campaigns. Kendall pointed out that Labour lost both those elections.
Starmer says he has to protect taxpayers, as he defends not paying compensationt to Waspi women
Keir Starmer has said he accepts that Waspi women will be unhappy with the government’s decision not to pay them compensation.
In an interview with broadcasters in Estonia, asked if he understood the anger of those affected, Starmer replied:
I do understand their concerns. The ombudsman’s findings were clear in relation to maladministration, but also clear about the lack of direct financial injustice, as the ombudsman saw it. That’s why we’ve taken the decision that we’ve taken.
But I do understand, of course, the concern of the Waspi women.
But also I have to take into account whether it’s right at the moment to impose a further burden on the taxpayer, which is what it would be.
Tories says it is Labour’s decision not to compensate Waspi women ‘and they need to own it’
The last Conservative government did not give any indication that it was likely to accept the ombudsman’s recommendations if it won the election and, in her response to Liz Kendall, Helen Whately, the shadow work and pensions secretary, did not argue that the government should have taken an alternative decision.
But she did say this was now Labour’s decision, and they had to “own it”. In the Commons she told MPs:
No doubt campaigners will note the government’s apology for the decisions made between 2005 and 2007 which led to a 28-month delay in sending out letters which the ombudsman identified as maladministration but let’s be clear, the decision to provide no compensation is the government’s decision and they need to own it.
I’m not going to let them get away with saying that this is because of a fictional black hole in the public finances. The country’s financial position now is a result of their political choices.
They should not try to dodge responsibility by suggesting to waspi women that if times were different, they might have come to a different conclusion.
Waspi campaign says government’s decision ‘bizarre and totally unjustified’
Waspi, the Women Against State Pension Inequality campaign, has condemned the government’s decision as “totally unjustified”. This is from its chair, Angela Madden.
The government has today made an unprecedented political choice to ignore the clear recommendations of an independent watchdog which ordered ministers urgently to compensate Waspi women nine months ago.
This is a bizarre and totally unjustified move which will leave everyone asking what the point of an ombudsman is if ministers can simply ignore their decisions. It feels like a decision that would make the likes of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump blush.
The idea that an ‘action plan’ to avoid such mistakes in future should be the result of a six-year ombudsman’s investigation is an insult both to the women and to the PHSO [Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman] process.
An overwhelming majority of MPs back Waspi’s calls for fair compensation and all options remain on the table. Parliament must now seek an alternative mechanism to force this issue on to the order paper so justice can be done.
What Kendall told MPs about why government ignoring Waspi women compensation recommendation
Here are more quotes from Liz Kendall’s statement to MPs saying the government won’t accept the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s recommendation on compensation for Waspi women.
-
Kendall said the ombudsman’s report did not criticise the decision in 1995 to increase the state pension age for women, or the coalition’s decision in 2011 to accelerate that increase. The report covered instead complaints about the Department for Work and Pensions not properly warning women about the increase, she said. Decisions made between 2005 and 2007 led to a 28-month delay in warning letters being sent to women born in the 1950s. The report said that did not result in the women suffering direct financial lost. But, Kendall told MPs, it was maladministration according to the report.
[The report] references research from 2004 showing 43% of women aged over 60 were aware of their state pension age. But it doesn’t sufficiently sufficiently recognise evidence from the same research that 73% of women aged 45 to 54 were aware that the state pension age was increasing – the very group that covers women born in the 1950s. Or research from 2006 that 90% of women aged 45 to 54 were aware that the state pension age was increasing.
Research given to the ombudsman shows only around a quarter of people who are sent unsolicited letters actually remember receiving them or reading them. So we cannot accept that in the great majority of cases sending a letter earlier would have affected whether women knew their state pension age was rising or would have increased their opportunities to make informed decisions.
These two facts – that most women knew the state pension age was increasing and that letters aren’t as significant as the Ombudsman says – as well as other reasons have informed our conclusion that there should be no scheme of financial compensation to 1950s-born women in response to the ombudsman’s report.
-
And she said paying a flat rate of compensation, as recommended by the ombudsman, would not be would be “a fair or proportionate use of taxpayers money”.
First, we want to work with the ombudsman to develop a detailed action plan out of the report, so every and all lessons are learnt.
Second, we are committed to setting clear and sufficient notice of any changes in the state pension age so people can properly plan for their retirement.
And third, I have tasked officials to develop a strategy for effective, timely and modern communication on the state pension that uses the most up to date methods.
Liz Kendall tells MPs Waspi women won’t get compensation, despite ombudsman saying they should
In March the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman published a report saying that the so-called Waspi women (Women Against State Pension Inequality) deserved compensation because they did not get adequate warning from the government about the fact that their state pension age was going up. It said people affected should be paid compensation, and that this could cost up to £10.5bn.
At the time the Conservatives, who were then in government, and Labour, who were expecting to replace them within months, refused to commit to accepting the recommendation. But the then government said it would take time to consider the report properly, and Labour also put off a definitive response.
In a statement to the Commons, Liz Kendall has now delivered the government’s formal response. And she has ruled out paying compensation.
She told MPs:
Given the vast majority of women knew the state pension age was increasing, the government does not believe paying a flat rate to all women at a cost of up to £10.5bn would be a fair or proportionate use of taxpayers money, not least when the previous government failed to set aside a single penny for any compensation scheme, and when they left us a £22bn in the public finances.
This has been an extremely difficult decision to take, but we believe it is the right course of action, and we are determined to learn all the lessons to ensure this type of maladministration never happens again.
David Gauke, the Conservative former justice secretary, has written an interesting assessment of Kemi Badenoch’s start as Tory leader for the New Statesman. He has never been an enthusiast for her brand of rightwing politics, but he is an astute commentator and so his insights are worth passing on. He thinks she has had “an underwhelming but not disastrous start”. In particular, he claims she is not establishing a good relationship with colleagues.
Talking to Conservative MPs, the concerns about her handling of colleagues have not abated. She is described as “distant” and “not engaging”. “She turns up to vote at the last moment, rushes through with one of her friends and doesn’t speak to anyone else,” says one MP. Another says, “She can’t even bring herself to make eye contact with and say, ‘Hello’ to people she dislikes.” Her team of close advisers are viewed as not providing sufficient challenge to her.
These are problems – perhaps driven by shyness more than anything else – that can be overcome. There is no sign that a coup is imminent, but she should be wary. One look at the range of subjects beyond his brief on which Robert Jenrick posts on X suggests that the runner-up in the last Tory leadership race has not abandoned his ambitions.
Gauke is now leading a review of sentencing policy for the Labour government.
The Liberal Democrats have claimed that the extra funding for police announced by the Home Office today (see ) is not as generous as it appears. (See 11.04am.) They explain:
Of the £986.8m of extra funding for police announced today in the provisional police grant report (England and Wales) 2025-26, around a quarter or £230.3m is just to cover the government’s national insurance tax rise. Another £329.8m is based on extra council tax, and assumes that all police and crime commissioners will raise their precept by the maximum permitted of £14 for band D.
This means the extra government cash to forces is only £426.8m – half the amount the Home Office is claiming.
Lisa Smart, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson, said:
Years of failure and ineffective resourcing from the previous Conservative government decimated neighbourhood policing – taking officers off our streets and leaving our communities far less safe.
The government should be stepping up to fix this by properly funding the officers our communities need – not passing the buck to local police chiefs to put up people’s council tax instead.
