DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Labour's raw deal for British business

Whenever politicians promise a 'new deal' it's time to count the spoons. Like the terms 'modernisation' and 'radical reform', it's usually a cover for something you'll come to regret.

So it is with Labour's New Deal for Working People. Superficially it sounds lovely.

Better wages, greater employment protection, more generous sick pay, stronger rights to flexible and home working, an end to 'zero-hours', no more annoying out-of-hours work calls and, of course, the repeal of every piece of anti-strike legislation brought in since 2010.

It will be, says a Labour spokesman, 'the biggest transformation of the British economy for aeons'. Which is exactly what the business community is afraid of.

In their quarterly economic survey yesterday, the British Chambers of Commerce say many of their member firms are in a fragile state, especially those in hospitality. 

Nearly half don't expect an increase in revenue over the next 12 months and one in five think profits will fall. Where's Labour's new deal for them?

What they don't need is another steep increase in costs, lower productivity, and a whole lot of instructions about how to run their business from an overweening state.

City grandee led a chorus of criticism, warning the proposed policies could see firms collapse, widespread job losses and a soaring welfare bill.

Working from home is a privilege, not a right, and not all companies can offer it. Equally, many jobs aren't nine-to-five, so out-of-hours calls come with the territory.

Zero-hours contracts suit some part-time workers, while additional wage rises would have to be passed on to customers, making some firms uncompetitive.

And as for strikes, public services from railways and schools to the NHS have been ravaged by industrial action in recent years. Labour's plans could inflict similar mayhem on the private sector.

The architect of this workers' paradise is deputy leader and property expert Angela Rayner, who dismisses criticism as the 'squealing' of vested interests. She would rush in the new legislation within 100 days of winning power.

Yet still, Sir Keir Starmer has the gall to claim Labour is 'the party of business'. It's about as convincing as Ms Rayner's excuses for not paying capital gains tax on the sale of her ex-council house.

Clinics must tell all

One of the many shocking revelations in the Cass report on NHS gender services for under-18s was that six of seven adult gender dysphoria clinics across the country refused to provide information to the review panel.

Some 9,000 patients were referred from child to adult treatment centres over the years. With so little research material on long-term outcomes, details of their progress could shed light on the lasting effects of these controversial therapies.

Dr Hilary Cass was damning in her criticisms, saying the steep rise in gender reassignment was driven more by ideology than science. Data available to doctors about the impacts of puberty blockers and sex-change hormones was 'wholly inadequate', she said.

Could it be these clinics have something to hide about the damage being done to young bodies and minds? If not, why are they being so obstructive?

The NHS yesterday announced a wider review of all transgender treatment. All seven clinics must be made to cooperate. Data may be anonymised but if a full picture is to emerge of this sorry saga, their files must be opened to proper scrutiny.