Sue Gray declined to make representations to inquiry into her role with Labour, Dowden says – as it happened

• The government has paused an internal inquiry into Sue Gray’s departure from Whitehall which was widely expected to have concluded that she had broken the civil service code. In a written statement, the Cabinet Office minister Oliver Dowden said the former senior official had not engaged with the investigation into her departure so it would be suspended while the government considered “next steps”. The report was now not expected to be published until after the government’s appointments watchdog decided whether to delay Gray’s start date as Keir Starmer’s chief of staff. Gray is prioritising the government’s anti-corruption watchdog investigation into her move to Labour over the Cabinet Office’s, Dave Penman, leader of the FDA union which represents senior Whitehall staff, told Times Radio.

• Pat Cullen, the RCN general secretary, said the union is balloting its members again on strike action. Last time the union organised ballots by individual employment unit, which means some hospital trusts voted to strike and some didn’t. This time the RCN is holding a single ballot across the NHS as a whole.

• Steve Barclay, the health secretary, said no complaints have been raised with him about his treatment of officials. Asked about last week’s Guardian report saying officials from the Department of Health have “raised concerns” about his alleged conduct towards civil servants, Barclay told journalists: “Well, no complaints were raised with me. But it’s important that we work constructively together. I hugely value the work officials within the department do.”

• Survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster are facing a longer wait for justice than hoped after the public inquiry team said it was unlikely to send its report to Rishi Sunak before 2024. The inquiry said: “We shall send the report to the prime minister, as required by our terms of reference, as soon as we can but that will probably not be possible before the beginning of next year.

• “The prime minister will decide when the report will be published and by whom, but we are ready to act quickly if he asks us to publish it, as we think likely.”

• Health unions representing the majority of NHS workers have recommended that a revised pay offer made by the government should be implemented, according to a joint statement from members of the NHS staff council. This means that the NHS staff council is backing the pay deal for nurses, ambulance staff and other non-doctor employees working for the NHS, and that the deal will be implemented.

• James Cleverly, the foreign secretary, risked the wrath of his backbenchers by saying he expects to meet China’s vice-president when he visits the UK for the king’s coronation. Han Zheng, who has been blamed for overseeing a crackdown on freedom in Hong Kong, was recently appointed as president Xi Jinping’s deputy and is set to represent China at the event.

The Cabinet Office has made a “confidential assessment” to the anti-corruption watchdog and will not provide further information on Sue Gray’s departure “whilst we consider next steps”, Oliver Dowden said.

Here is more from Dowden, who said that due to rules around employee confidentiality, he is “unable at this stage” to provide further details from the inquiry.

The deputy minister confirmed the Cabinet Office has made submissions to the advisory committee on business appointments (Acoba), which provides advice on applications from senior civil servants who wish to take up appointments elsewhere, and can recommend a waiting period – something Labour has committed to abide by.

Oliver Dowden has just provided an update on the inquiry and said in a statement to parliament that the process “involved interviewing relevant persons” to establish “further details” on any communication between Sue Gray and Sir Keir Starmer.

However, Gray chose not to speak to the inquiry.

Dowden wrote: “On March 6 2023, Minister for the Cabinet Office and HM Paymaster General announced in reply to an Urgent Question that the Cabinet Office had been asked to look into the circumstances leading to the resignation of Sue Gray, the former Permanent Secretary for the Union and the Constitution and committed to update Parliament as appropriate.

“This process has involved interviewing relevant persons to establish further details on the contact between Ms Gray and the Leader of the Opposition.

“I can update the House that Ms Gray was given the opportunity to make representations as part of this process but chose not to do so.”

Pat Cullen, the RCN general secretary, has just given an interview to Radio 4’s PM programme.

Earlier she confirmed that the RCN is balloting its members again on strike action. (See 3.23pm.) Last time the union organised ballots by individual employment unit, which means some hospital trusts voted to strike and some didn’t. This time the RCN is holding a single ballot across the NHS as a whole.

The presenter Evan Davis suggested to Cullen that this would make it less likely for the RCN to get a majority in favour of further strike action. Cullen said the union disagreed. She said that last time many places voted in favour of a strike, but were thwarted because the turnout threshold (50% of members have to take part for a strike ballot to be valid) was not met.

Asked what would happen if the union did not vote for further strike action, Cullen said that would not stop the union campaigning for a better pay rise.

That is all from me for today. My colleague Nadeem Badshah is taking over. He will be here to cover the Sue Gray report, when it finally arrives.

Lawrence Dunhill, from the Health Service Journal, has got details of the vote by unions on the NHS staff council to accept the NHS pay offer.

There are 15 unions on the council, although only 12 of them have members covered by the agenda for change pay process and they were the ones that voted. Their votes were weighted according to how many NHS members they have.

Dunhill has this breakdown. He says 61% of weighted voters were in favour.

The two biggest unions are Unison (the biggest), which was in favour, and the Royal College of Nursing, which was against.

The other unions in favour were: the GMB, the British Association of Occupational Therapists, the Royal College of Midwives, the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy, the British Orthoptic Society, the British Dietetic Association and the Federation of Clinical Scientists.

The other unions against were: Unite, the Society of Radiographers and the College of Podiatry.

Steve Barclay, the health secretary, has said that no complaints have been raised with him about his treatment of officials.

Asked about last week’s Guardian report saying officials from the Department of Health have “raised concerns” about his alleged conduct towards civil servants, Barclay told journalists:

Well, no complaints were raised with me.

But it’s important that we work constructively together. I hugely value the work officials within the department do.

He also said ministers and officials were “working very closely together”, as they had been over the weekend on issues like the NHS pay dispute and the evacuation of NHS medics from Sudan.

Survivors of the Grenfell Tower disaster are facing a longer wait for justice than hoped after the public inquiry team said today it was unlikely to send its report to Rishi Sunak before 2024 - coming up to seven years after the fire that claimed 72 lives.

Quashing hopes that the report could be out this autumn, thereby allowing the Metropolitan police to progress towards conclusion on their criminal investigations, the inquiry said:

We shall send the report to the prime minister, as required by our terms of reference, as soon as we can but that will probably not be possible before the beginning of next year.

The prime minister will decide when the report will be published and by whom, but we are ready to act quickly if he asks us to publish it, as we think likely.

The panel and whole inquiry team will spare no effort to finish work on the report as soon as possible and will continue to do their utmost to complete the work within the time indicated.

One lawyer acting for the bereaved said it meant that the police might not now be in a position to make the case for criminal charges to be brought before 2025. Scotland Yard has said it will wait for the inquiry conclusion before making recommendations to the Crown Prosecution Service.

The report into the causes of the fire and the responsibilities of those involved is expected to be “substantially larger” than the 856-page 2019 phase one report into the night of the fire and the fire brigade response. The inquiry has disclosed more than 300,000 documents, obtained over 1,500 witness statements and has sat for more than 300 days.

Meanwhile, the high court heard confirmation on Tuesday that several organisations involved in the fire have agreed to pay £150m compensation to around 900 civil claimants.

Plaid Cymru politicians have strongly criticised the “exorbitant” cost of the coronation at a time when food banks are struggling to keep up with demand.

Speaking in the Senedd, Luke Fletcher, said the morality of spending £100m or more on a “pageant” when people were living in poor conditions in social housing, students were dropping out of education and people could not afford to feed their children or heat their homes had to be questioned. He said:

How can we justify spending on such extravagance when that is the state of the country? If we want to bring everyone together, sort out the problems rather than spending an exorbitant amount of money on a pageant.

Another Plaid MS (member of the Senedd) Sioned Williams said the food bank of which she was a trustee in Swansea Valley was sending out 40% more food parcels than this time last year. She went on:

This is the context in which the coronation ceremony is happening. It demonstrates the profound economic and geographical divides in our unequal disunited kingdom.

Mick Antoniw, the counsel general in the Welsh Labour government, said he recognised the picture the Plaid members painted and blamed the UK government’s policies. But he also said the coronation was a time for Wales to come together, adding:

There can be no doubt about the commitment his majesty has shown to this country, his interest in its people and culture and in our devolved institutions and parliament.

Unite was the other main health union to vote against the pay deal at the NHS staff council. Sharon Graham, its general secretary, says it will be escalating its strike action.

The Royal College of Nursing is opposed to the government’s pay offer and it voted against it at the NHS staff council meeting today. But it was outvoted because most unions were in favour, including Unison, the union with most NHS members.

Pat Cullen, the RCN’s general secretary, has written to Steve Barclay, the health secretary, said that her union will carry on with its plan to ballot members on further strike action. She says:

I entirely respect those, in our membership and that of other unions, who voted to accept. However, that was not the prevailing view of nursing staff. Nursing is the largest part of the NHS workforce and they require an offer that matches their true value.

We understand the government’s intention now to pay the award to the NHS workforce as a whole. Though the pay offer was not enough for our members, I have repeatedly said that the government’s approach should be to build upon it and that remains our position.

Later this month, we will ballot 280,000 members in England’s NHS over further strike action to be held between June and December 2023. We will hold an aggregated ballot under the relevant legislation which, if supported by a sufficient number of RCN members, would provide the legal mandate to take strike action across the full NHS. Until this point, our strike action has been in approximately 50% of NHS trusts and other NHS employers.

Cullen also said she would like to continue talks with Barclay on pay. Barclay has said that the pay offer is final, but that he is open to talks on “workforce changes”. (See 2.38pm.)

Organisations representing NHS leaders have welcomed the NHS staff council vote in favour of the pay deal.

Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, said:

Health leaders will welcome confirmation that the NHS staff council has voted as a majority to accept the government’s pay offer as it will give most NHS workers in England certainty about their pay after several months of negotiation and disruption.

It is now incumbent on the government to implement the deal as soon as possible and to make sure that local NHS leaders do not have to cover the increased cost from their existing budgets, failure to do this would have an extremely negative impact on patient care at a time when there are still millions of people on waiting lists …

Also, health leaders are concerned that with four trade unions remaining in dispute with the government over this deal that the worrying prospect of further industrial action remains. Added to that, health leaders are eager for a resolution to be agreed between the government and BMA as the last junior doctors strikes saw 196,000 appointments and planned procedures needing to be postponed.

And Sir Julian Hartley, the chief executive of NHS Providers, said:

Trust leaders are breathing a sigh of relief at today’s decision. We hope that this brings an end to the most disruptive period of industrial action in NHS history.

But the NHS isn’t out of the woods yet …

Industrial action over the past six months has led to more than 531,000 patient appointments being rescheduled, but we must remember that care backlogs stretch back long before strikes and the pandemic due to years of underfunding and many thousands of vacancies.

Steve Barclay, the health secretary, has confirmed that the government will implement the pay deal for all NHS staff under the agenda for change framework (which means nurses, and almost all other NHS staff apart from doctors).

In a statement, Barclay also said that he hoped members of unions opposed to the deal – ie, the Royal College of Nursing and Unite – would recognise this was a “fair outcome” and call off further strikes. He said:

I’m pleased the NHS staff council has voted to accept our pay offer, demonstrating that a majority of NHS staff agree this is a fair and reasonable deal.

It is now my intention to implement this for all staff on the agenda for change contract and where some unions may choose to remain in dispute, we hope their members – many of whom voted to accept this offer – will recognise this as a fair outcome that carries the support of their colleagues and decide it is time to bring industrial action to an end.

We will continue to engage constructively with unions on workforce changes to ensure the NHS is the best place to work for staff, patients and taxpayers.

Sara Gorton, head of health at Unison, the largest health union, and chair of the union group on the NHS staff council, said she hoped NHS workers would now get the extra money (5% extra for 2023-24, a one-off payment of 2% for 2022-23, plus another one-off “Covid recovery bonus” worth 4%) in June.

But she said the pay dispute should never have reached this stage, and she said she hoped a new process would stop this happening again. In a statement she said:

NHS workers will now want the pay rise they’ve voted to accept. The hope is that the one-off payment and salary increase will be in June’s pay packets.

But health staff shouldn’t have needed to take action in the first place – unions made clear to ministers last summer that £1,400 wasn’t enough to stop staff leaving the NHS, nor prevent strikes, but the government wouldn’t listen.

Proper pay talks last autumn could have stopped health workers missing out on money they could ill afford to lose.

The NHS and patients would also have been spared months of disruption.

This pay deal must be the start of something new in the NHS, there cannot be a repeat of the past few months. Everyone who cares about the NHS deserves better. That means improving the process that sets health worker wages.

The NHS remains desperately short of staff too. Services can only cope with growing demand if there’s a properly resourced and well-supported workforce. Government must now work with unions to achieve just that.

PA Media has snapped this.

Health unions representing the majority of NHS workers have recommended that a revised pay offer made by the government should be implemented, according to a joint statement from members of the NHS staff council.

This means that the NHS staff council is backing the pay deal for nurses, ambulance staff and other non-doctor employees working for the NHS, and that the deal will be implemented.

The RCN and Unite are still opposed to this pay deal, and they could continue to use strike action to press for a better deal.

But ministers hope that, once RCN and Unite members start receiving the extra pay (which they will regardless of their unions’ positions), and once they realise they do not have the support of other health unions, they will be less likely to back further strikes.

During the Labour leadership contest Keir Starmer famously made 10 pledges. This morning he claimed he had kept “the vast majority” of them. (See 10am.)

Working out whether he is right is not straightforward, because each pledge contains several components and we don’t yet know what Labour will promise in its manifesto. But Starmer is probably overstating his success rate. Looking at each pledge, and taking into account which element was most significant at the time, five of them are arguable kept, another two are partly kept, and three have been broken.

Starmer has always defended the right of politicians to change their minds, and he says two of the pledges have been abandoned because economic circumstances have changed.

A 50%, or 70%, compliance rate does not sound great, but he is probably doing a lot better than Rishi Sunak. Sunak proposed dozens of policies when he was running for the Tory leadership contest in the summer. He did not issue any manifesto when he stood a second time, uncontested, in the autumn, and No 10 subsequently said the summer pledges would all have to be reviewed.

Here is my assessment of Starmer’s record.

Pledge 1 – economic justice

What it says: “Increase income tax for the top 5% of earners, reverse the Tories’ cuts in corporation tax and clamp down on tax avoidance, particularly of large corporations. No stepping back from our core principles.”

Kept or broken?: PARTLY KEPT. Labour under Starmer is committed to tackling tax avoidance, and reversing corporation tax isn’t just Labour policy, but has become Tory policy too. But Starmer is no longer promising tax rises for the top 5% of earners, which was the key element of this package.

Pledge 2 – social justice

What it says: “Abolish universal credit and end the Tories’ cruel sanctions regime. Set a national goal for wellbeing to make health as important as GDP; Invest in services that help shift to a preventative approach. Stand up for universal services and defend our NHS. Support the abolition of tuition fees and invest in lifelong learning.”

Kept or broken?: BROKEN. The tuition fees promise was the most salient of these pledges, in the context of the leadership contest, and that has now gone. (See 9.01am.) Labour has also clarified its position on universal credit, saying it will reform it, but not abolish it. (No one ever expected the party to tear up the whole system, but Starmer was happy to use the word “abolish”, as Labour had in 2019).

Pledge 3 – climate justice

What it says: “Put the Green New Deal at the heart of everything we do. There is no issue more important to our future than the climate emergency. A Clean Air Act to tackle pollution locally. Demand international action on climate rights.”

Kept or broken?: KEPT. A climate investment pledge worth £28bn a year is one of Starmer’s biggest election commitments.

Pledge 4 – promote peace and human rights

What it says: “No more illegal wars. Introduce a Prevention of Military Intervention Act and put human rights at the heart of foreign policy. Review all UK arms sales and make us a force for international peace and justice.”

Kept or broken?: PARTLY KEPT. Starmer has not backed any illegal wars. But he has done little to advance these proposals either since he was elected leader three years ago, and Labour MPs were ordered to abstain on the overseas operation bill, which was hard to square with the spirit of this pledge.

Pledge 5 – common ownership

What it says: “Public services should be in public hands, not making profits for shareholders. Support common ownership of rail, mail, energy and water; end outsourcing in our NHS, local government and justice system.”

Kept or broken?: BROKEN. Starmer has accepted this. On the Today programme this morning, when asked about his pledges, he was open about this. He said:

I’m not ideological about it. We have said when it comes to railways, for example, we will bring railways back into public ownership as the contracts expire. We’ve set up GB Energy which will be a publicly owned company.

But when I looked in the middle of the energy price crisis last year, I asked my team to work out how much it would cost for us to nationalise the energy companies, and what benefit [there] would then be for those that were paying very high bills, and the answer was, it cost a lot but you couldn’t really reduce the bills by doing it. So I made a political choice that we wouldn’t do that.

Asked about water companies, he said nationalising them would cost a “huge” amount and that tighter regulation could address the water quality problem.

Pledge 6 – defend migrants’ rights

What it says: “Full voting rights for EU nationals. Defend free movement as we leave the EU. An immigration system based on compassion and dignity. End indefinite detention and call for the closure of centres such as Yarl’s Wood.”

Kept or broken?: BROKEN. Free movement was a key issue for Labour members in 2019-20, and Starmer admits that it is no longer something he supports. On the Today programme this morning he argued that what he really meant was “defend free movement until we leave the EU”, but that is not what he said at the time.

Pledge 7 – strengthen workers’ rights and trade unions

What it says: “Work shoulder to shoulder with trade unions to stand up for working people, tackle insecure work and low pay. Repeal the Trade Union Act. Oppose Tory attacks on the right to take industrial action and the weakening of workplace rights.”

Kept or broken?: KEPT. Labour is proposing measures to strengthen workers’ rights, and it has voted against the government’s anti-strikes bill.

Pledge 8 – radical devolution of power, wealth and opportunity

What it says: “Push power, wealth and opportunity away from Whitehall. A federal system to devolve powers – including through regional investment banks and control over regional industrial strategy. Abolish the House of Lords – replace it with an elected chamber of regions and nations.”

Kept or broken?: KEPT. In December last year Starmer welcomed a long and detailed report from Gordon Brown saying how this could happen. Some observers suspect that, in power, Labour would shelve Lords reform, but currently this is still very much on track.

Pledge 9 – equality

What it says: “Pull down obstacles that limit opportunities and talent. We are the party of the Equal Pay Act, Sure Start, BAME representation and the abolition of Section 28 – we must build on that for a new decade.”

Kept or broken?: KEPT. Under Starmer Labour has developed a series of policies to promote the equalities agenda.

Pledge 10 – effective opposition to the Tories

What it says: “Forensic, effective opposition to the Tories in Parliament – linked up to our mass membership and a professional election operation. Never lose sight of the votes ‘lent’ to the Tories in 2019. Unite our party, promote pluralism and improve our culture. Robust action to eradicate the scourge of antisemitism. Maintain our collective links with the unions.”

Kept or broken?: KEPT. Labour’s candidate selection suggests promoting pluralism is not a priority for Starmer (leftwingers are being purged), but no one can deny that the party is providing effective opposition to the Tories. The latest Politico poll of polls has Labour 14 points ahead.

James Cleverly, the foreign secretary, risked the wrath of his backbenchers today by saying he expects to meet China’s vice-president when he visits the UK for the king’s coronation.

Han Zheng, who has been blamed for overseeing a crackdown on freedom in Hong Kong, was recently appointed as president Xi Jinping’s deputy and is set to represent China at the event.

In a speech last week Cleverly said he wanted to increase British engagement with China, telling the BBC on Tuesday that Britain would not benefit from gagging itself in its discussions with Beijing.

Today he vowed that in meetings with Xi’s deputy he would raise issues including Hong Kong and human rights abuses in Xinjiang province. He stressed that “engagement does not mean agreement” with China.

Asked if he would meet the Chinese vice-president, Cleverly replied:

I suspect that I will. And when I do, I will discuss a whole range of things, just as I do when I meet other Chinese officials, including those areas where we have points of criticism.

When officials from the UK and China engage, Cleverly said he “always” takes the opportunity to ensure “the Chinese government understand our views on a range of issues, including those issues where we feel strongly their behaviour is inappropriate, like, for example, their failure to abide by the commitments in Hong Kong or by the treatment of the Uyghur minority in Xinjiang and others”.

The Foreign Office has increasingly taken the view that it is possible to protect the UK democracy and its strategic economic assets from Chinese interference whilst maintaining a dialogue on other issues such as health and climate change.

Senior Tories including former leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith have strongly criticised the invitation for Han. But Cleverly said it was “incredibly important” to continue talking to the Chinese government. He said:

Because the simple fact is countries all around the world have got to have conversations with other countries. Sometimes those conversations are very collaborative, with our close friends and allies, sometimes they are much more about what we disagree on.

With the relationship with China, it is incredibly important that we continue to have conversations.

To basically gag ourselves, to limit our own ability to exert influence, would be counterproductive.

Beijing was represented by Han’s predecessor, Wang Qishan, at the Queen’s funeral.

The Foreign Office is not expecting another ruler with a controversial human rights record, the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, to attend the coronation. Saudi Arabia will instead be represented by Turki bin Muhammed Al Saud, a member of the Saudi council of ministers.

The Green party has attacked Keir Starmer for abandoning his promise to get rid of tuition fees and confirmed that it still favours their abolition.

Adrian Ramsay, the party’s co-leader, said:

This is the latest U-turn from Keir Starmer’s Labour and this time it’s students who are paying a heavy price. The Green party believes tuition fees should be scrapped and grants restored.

Higher education is a public good and should therefore be properly funded by government. Students in England pay some of the highest fees in the world, while in Scotland, Germany and Sweden university education is free. This shows that the whopping £9,000 charge for students, introduced by the coalition government and now backed by Labour, is a political choice.

Publicly funded higher education is not only possible but essential to a society committed to equality and social mobility.

Momentum, the Labour group set up to promote Jeremy Corbyn’s agenda when he was party leader, claims that Keir Starmer could end up like Nick Clegg if he abandons his promise to abolish tuition fees.

Responding to what Starmer said on this this morning (see 9.01am), Momentum spokesperson said:

This move wouldn’t just fly in the face of party democracy and the wishes of Labour Students. It would be a betrayal of millions of young people in desperate need of hope. The Labour leadership should learn from Nick Clegg’s failure, not repeat it.

Keir was elected on a promise to abolish tuition fees. With higher education in crisis and young people facing a future of high rents & even higher debts, this pledge is more urgent than ever. Trust matters. Young people matter.

The Liberal Democrats under Clegg saw their support among younger voters collapse after they performed a U-turn on tuition fees after going into coalition with the Tories in 2010. It was one of the main reasons why they went from having 57 MPs after the 2010 election to just eight after the one in 2015.

But Starmer’s U-turn is different, for at least two differences. Clegg went back on a manifesto promise, whereas Starmer has gone back on a promise made in a leadership contest, to party members not to the electorate as a whole.

And the Liberal Democrats did not just commit to abolishing tuition fees in their manifesto; most of their MPs signed a pledge saying they would “vote against any increase in fees in the next parliament” – only for Clegg, and many others, to do the precise opposite when they were in the coalition government, voting in favour of a huge increase in fees.

Student opinion may also have moved on a bit on this issue since 2010. See 11.29am.

A new poll shows that just one in four students support Labour’s Corbyn-era policy to abolish university tuition fees in England, as Keir Starmer is widely expected to ditch Labour’s previous commitment.

The survey for the Higher Education Policy Institute found that just 28% of students in England want Labour to abolish tuition fees, while 20% want Labour to keep the current system of fees capped at £9,250 a year. Of the rest, 23% want Labour to cut undergraduate tuition fees to £6,000, and 15% want fees cut to £3,000, with 4% backing a graduate tax instead.

The poll of 1,000 undergraduates conducted by Savanta found that 46% of students said they would vote Labour while just 7% said they backed the Conservatives. Some 10% supported the Greens and 5% the Lib Dems.

Nick Hillman, director of HEPI, said:

The results won’t make happy reading for the Conservative party, who now have minimal support among undergraduates. While they will make happier reading for Labour, it is clear there is no single student funding model that would be overwhelmingly popular with students. This will make the opposition’s job harder as they firm up their policies in the run-up to the next [general] election.

There was stronger support among students for a maintenance grant aimed at poorer students, and more generous maintenance loans for all students.

Most students also said they supported the staff strikes over pay and pensions that have hit British universities this year, with 67% in support and only 16% opposed to industrial action.

In his Today interview Keir Starmer also implied that he was no longer committed to the pledge he made during the Labour leadership to increase income tax for the top 5% of earners (which is what the party proposed in the 2019 election campaign). When the presenter, Justin Webb, put it him that this would be a good option for a government needing more money, Starmer replied:

Justin, we are in a different situation now because obviously – I think we’ve got the highest tax burden since world war two.

When Webb pressed him on this, Starmer said “those with the broadest shoulders should, of course, pay more”. He said some Labour policies reflected this, and repeated the point he made in another interview about the need for a tougher windfall tax on energy firms. (See 9.44am.)

Webb then asked individuals, and asked again why Labour was not in favour of the wealthy paying more in income tax or capital gains tax. Starmer replied:

Justin, we’ve got the highest tax burden since the second world war. What we’ve had from the government is tax rise upon tax rise on tax rise. If they’ve proved one thing, it’s that their high-tax, low-growth economy doesn’t work.

What we’ve seen over the last 13 years is an economy that hasn’t worked. It hasn’t grown at any reasonable rate. That the net cause of the cost of living crisis, the reason why people’s wages haven’t gone up cost, why their living standards haven’t gone up. People will be asking themselves after 13 years, am I any better off? And the answer to that is no.

Now the question you then put to me: ‘Well, wouldn’t it be therefore sensible to raise taxes even higher’, I think the high-tax, low-growth model doesn’t work.

At that point Webb pointed out that they wealthy had been doing “pretty well” recently. So why not ask them to pay more in tax. Starmer replied:

Justin, that’s because my answer on what we do about the economy is we’ve got to grow the economy. And so I accept, Justin, I’m giving you a different answer to perhaps previous Labour leaders, which would always go straight to tax and spend.

I’m saying my central focus is on growing our economy.

If we had grown our economy at the same rate as we did under the last Labour government, we would have had tens of billions of pounds to spend on public services without raising tax. That’s why I’ve said … the number one mission will be growing the economy.

Webb then asked Starmer if he was arguing that putting taxes up for the rich would suppress growth. Starmer replied:

I actually think that the way to grow our economy is to have a different model for our economy.

Webb pressed him again. Would putting up taxes for the rich suppress the economy? Starmer replied:

I think it depends … I do agree with the principle that those with the broadest shoulders should pay more, pay their fair share.

But you are not going to enforce that, Webb suggested. Starmer replied:

That has been a principle and is of course an important principle.

But I am deliberately trying to shift the discussion because I do genuinely believe that the way to get our economy functioning again is to have a proper plan for growth. We haven’t had that for 13 years.

I’ve quoted the exchange at some length because, although Starmer backed away from the proposal to put up tax for the top 5% some time ago, and although he is now branding Labour as the party of “lower taxes for working people”, the exchange was significant because it showed quite how keen he is to distance himself from the more conventional “tax and spend” Labour tradition.

Starmer argued that the “high-tax, low-growth” model did not work. But there are plenty of people on the left who believe that there is a “high-tax, high-growth” model that might work. Starmer does not seem inclined to try.

Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, is calling for an investigation by the Competitions and Markets Authority into claims supermarkets are profiteering during the cost of living crisis, Jess Clark reports. Government figures show food and drink prices rose by almost 20% in the year to March, the fastest annual rate since 1977. Davey said:

We need to bring soaring food prices back under control and offer relief to families. That means cracking down on profiteering by food multinationals and the big supermarkets so customers get a fair deal.

In his Today interview Keir Starmer said he was no longer committed to the promise to abolish tuition fees that he made when standing for the Labour leadership because “we are in a different economic situation”.

But he claimed the “vast majority” of the promises he made in that contest, most famously set out in a list of 10 pledges, still applied. He told Today’s Justin Webb:

We are in a different economic situation. You and others would be quizzing me hard if I just simply said: ‘Well, I’m going to ignore the current economic situation and press on with something notwithstanding the cost when we get to an election in 2024’.

But there are very important pledges I made, the vast majority of which stand.

But some of them – one of them was, for example, defend free movement as we leave the EU. Well, we’ve left the EU, so we’re in a different situation. So that’s clear.

‘Vast majority’ is probably a generous way of counting. I’ll come back to this shortly with a proper analysis.

BP has beaten City forecasts to post one of the largest first-quarter profits in its history despite an easing in energy prices, Alex Lawson reports. It made £4bn in the first quarter of 2023.

In an interview with BBC Breakfast, Keir Starmer said these figures confirmed Labour’s argument that the windfall tax on energy companies did not go far enough.

He said that, while Labour “of course” wanted BP and other energy companies to be able to make profits “so they can invest”, the BP profits were “over and above” what was reasonable. He went on:

What we say in the Labour party is use that money, have a proper windfall tax that’s effective and use that money directly to freeze council tax.

The government has loopholes in the windfall tax they’ve put in place, so they aren’t using their money effectively.

Labour says one problem with the government’s windfall tax is that it allows an exemption for capital investment. Labour says it would remove this.

It also says that it would increase the rate of the windfall tax to 78%, which it says is the rate in Norway, and backdate it to January 2022. The government’s rate is 35%.

Together these changes would raise £10.4bn covering 2022-23 and 2023-24, Labour says.

This morning the Times has a story saying Keir Starmer is poised to abandon the pledge he made when he was running for the Labour leadership in 2020 to “support the abolition of tuition fees”. It was a continuation of a promise in Labour’s 2019 manifesto.

Starmer has been signalling that he will ditch this promise at least since last summer, when he refused to confirm it in a New Statesman interview. In January this year he indicated that economic changes since 2019 meant the promise would have to be revised. According to the Times, Starmer is now planning to give more details of his thinking in a speech later this month.

Asked about the story in his Today interview, Starmer said Labour would probably “move on” from the pledge. He said:

We are looking at options for how we fund these fees. The current system is unfair, it doesn’t really work for students, doesn’t work for universities.

Starmer said the party would, in the coming weeks, “set out a fairer solution”. He went on:

We are likely to move on from that commitment, because we do find ourselves in a different financial situation.

But Starmer said this did not mean Labour was “accepting for a moment that the current system is fair or that it is working”.

Good morning. We’re back waiting for the Sue Gray report. Today’s version will take the form of a written statement for a Cabinet Office minister described on the Commons order paper as an “update into the circumstances leading to the resignation of a senior civil servant”. This is the investigation ordered by the government into whether Gray, who had been a very senior civil servant as well as the author of the Partygate report, broke civil service rules by negotiating a move to become Keir Starmer’s chief of staff. In the past other senior officials have left the civil service to work for an opposition party, but Gray’s move was particularly controversial because news of her departure leaked before she had even resigned, and before she had told the civil service what she was doing.

At the weekend the Mail on Sunday reported that the inquiry into her departure was expected to say she broke civil service rules. It said:

Insiders told The Mail on Sunday they expect the Cabinet Office to conclude she breached the code on the grounds of ‘impartiality’, because she was involved in secret discussions with Labour when she was conducting sensitive meetings with ministers; of ‘honesty’, because Ministers were in the dark over the talks; and of ‘integrity’, because her professionalism could be called into question.

Today the Daily Telegraph has splashed on a similar story.

In his Telegraph report, Nick Gutteridge says:

Sue Gray held secret talks with Sir Keir Starmer while working for the team advising the Commons Partygate investigation, a report is set to reveal …

A report by the Cabinet Office is on Tuesday expected to find that she entered negotiations with Labour while she was working with the department’s Propriety and Ethics Team (PET). At the time the team was advising MPs on the privileges committee investigating Boris Johnson, which Tory sources said on Monday presented a conflict of interest.

This morning, in an interview with BBC Breakfast, Keir Starmer said he was confident that Gray had not broken any rules and that the government was only publishing this report now because it wanted to damage Labour ahead of Thursday’s local elections.

He said:

Firstly, I had no discussions with [Sue Gray] while she was investigating Boris Johnson [over Partygate] whatsoever. I don’t think anybody is suggesting that that is the case.

I’m confident that she hasn’t broken any of the rules.

Whenever a senior civil servant leaves the civil service, there’s always a process they have to go through before they take up another job. That’s the process she’s going through, quite rightly too.

Actually, today there’s nothing much new about this. And I’m afraid, with 48 hours to the election, what’s going on is the government is trying to sort of resurrect a story about Sue Gray mainly because they don’t want to talk about the cost living crisis, which actually is the thing that most people are most concerned about.

When it was put to him that the story was potentially damaging to Labour (Tories claim it undermines Starmer’s reputation as someone who always abides by the rules and proper process, and that hiring Gray has damaged the civil service’s reputation for impartiality), Starmer dismissed the story as an irrelevance. He said:

What I’d say to the government is, if you’re listening to people across the country, they’re not talking about Sue Gray. They’re talking about not being able to pay the bills. For heaven’s sake, talk about the issue which is of central concern to, I would have thought, most people watching this.

Starmer has also been on Radio 5 Live and the Today programme. I will post more from his interviews shortly.

Here is the agenda for the day.

Morning: Rishi Sunak chairs cabinet.

11.30am: Downing Street holds a lobby briefing.

Lunchtime: The NHS Staff Council meets to decide whether to accept the pay offer for nurses, ambulance staff and other non-doctor employees working in the NHS.

2.30pm: James Cleverly, the foreign secretary, takes questions in the Commons.

3pm: Helen Whately, the social care minister, gives evidence to the Commons health committee.

The Sue Gray written statement could come any time during the day.

If you want to contact me, do try the new “send us a message” feature. You’ll see it just below the byline – on the left of the screen, if you are reading on a PC or a laptop. (It is not available on the app yet.) This is for people who want to message me directly. I find it very useful when people message to point out errors (even typos – no mistake is too small to correct). Often I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either in the comments below the line, privately (if you leave an email address and that seems more appropriate), or in the main blog, if I think it is a topic of wide interest.