Keir Starmer's Labour reforms will 'DISRUPT' Britain with 'inflation and strikes' claims Mark Dolan

Their long time cheerleader, the Guardian’s Owen Jones has torn up his party membership because Starmer is not as radical as he would like.

Labour backbenchers threatened a mutiny over labour’s pro Israel stance, a major political embarrassment narrowly avoided by Starmer, when he reportedly convinced the speaker of the house of commons to cancel the vote altogether.

The Corbynites on the back benches – of whom there are far more than Labour would like to pretend – and the hard core lefties out there in the country, who were fast tracked into the party after Ed Milliband’s bonkers rule change on membership – are vocally unhappy with Starmer’s plans. “Starmer out” is often trending on Twitter – that doesn’t bode well, does it? And Labour’s more radical ideas are already an accident waiting to happen. Don't take my word for it.

New Labour mastermind Peter Mandelson speaking to the Sunday Times today has voiced concerns about Labour plans to bolster union power and burden businesses with extra costs and red tape, telling Labour to move slowly. And here’s why: Sir Keir has vowed to put forward drastic labour market reforms within the first hundred days of winning power.

The policy platform, being fronted by Angela Rayner - which should be a red flag in itself - would give all workers employment rights from their first day in the job. Now that sounds lovely doesn't it?

Who wouldn't argue with that. But what that means is that businesses could employ someone who is completely useless and be stuck with them. Companies would potentially have to use a four stage process, then potentially an employment tribunal, if someone was incompetent or even if they didn't turn up to work. Under those circumstances, companies will simply be reluctant to hire people in the first place. And what does that mean? More unemployment, you’re welcome.

They also want to end zero hours contracts for people who do casual work, on unspecified days and for unspecified hours. Like a lot of ideas from Labour, they are well intentioned. But the reality is that many people, including women with families and students enjoy the informal nature of zero hours contracts. I was on them for years. The flexibility is enjoyed by thousands, which is why so many people take advantage. If companies can't employ people casually, they will just make do with the staff they've got. What does that lead to? Yep, more unemployment and more people on benefits, in a country that’s already broke.

And then there are enhanced rights for the trade unions, including 1970s style collective bargaining. Again sounds lovely, but bear in mind how industrial action has crippled our railways, our health service and other sectors in recent months.

That’s before labour’s reforms, which will inevitably lead to further strike chaos, which means disrupted lives and yet more economic damage. Enhanced union power will also lead to more government borrowing, as Prime Minister Starmer is forced to grant unaffordable public sector wage settlements. A further consequence of that, is inflation. You are welcome.

It's what can only be described as a perfect economic storm. What about the £15 National Living Wage – an idea I am sympathetic to – of course – but what’s the reality?

It will devastate businesses and jobs in sectors such as hospitality, retail and social care. They will take on fewer people, or fold. I like policies that work, not ones that SOUND GOOD.

Now I believe that trade unions are of critical importance. Bosses will always try to rip off their workers, which is why all of the people watching and listening to this programme should have professional support and protection. But it's a fine balance between workers rights and a fair wage, versus crippling businesses, who generate the national income for this country that pays for everything, and who actually employee people.

The public sector, bankrolled by the taxpayer is already far too big, with many people doing nonsense jobs like diversity officers in the NHS. We need companies employing people, not the government. But these reforms under Labour threaten to make that less attractive.

The Tories are in a chaotic state at the moment, but if so called “chaos” means low unemployment, falling inflation, expected lower interest rates and modest economic growth, with a government that stands up to striking unions, I'll take that “chaos”.

The alternative is shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves, who has tried to paint herself as the new Margaret Thatcher this week, except it was Margaret Thatcher that dismantled the out of control unions, not embolden them. I’m not convinced by Labour’s claims of moderation. Keir Starmer is no Tony Blair, a man I voted for three times. And Rachel Reeves is no Margaret Thatcher. She’s more iron curtain than iron lady.