The US continues to roll back trans, gay and abortion rights, and the UK is not immune to any of it

I type this through nervous laughter but, haha, should we all be learning how to perform abortions? Just in case? Should we all perhaps, have a little stash of mifepristone in our makeup bags, a secret number in our phone? Something is happening in the US that requires our attention. Hard-earned rights are being erased and the speed at which history is being rewritten there does not bode well for our freedoms here. We are already seeing dark reflections in the glass. This month the Observer reported how British anti-abortion campaigners are echoing US vice-president JD Vance. He claimed our new buffer zone laws, preventing protests outside abortion clinics, were an attack on the “liberties of religious Britons”, shifting focus away from the reason they were implemented to a debate about freedom of speech.

Buffer zones (intended to protect staff and women using the clinics) are being targeted in a careful campaign by conservative Christian groups such as the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a group that wants to ban abortion, opposes same-sex marriage and, in the US, has helped at least 23 states pass legislation barring trans athletes from girls’ and women’s events as well as drafting legislation restricting gender-affirming treatment for minors. With only 1.4% of adolescents in the US identifying as transgender, LGBTQ+ rights groups accused the ADF of “whipping up a panic” over decisions better left to doctors, teachers and parents.

The US continues to roll back trans, gay and abortion rights, and the UK is not immune to any of it

I type this through nervous laughter but, haha, should we all be learning how to perform abortions? Just in case? Should we all perhaps, have a little stash of mifepristone in our makeup bags, a secret number in our phone? Something is happening in the US that requires our attention. Hard-earned rights are being erased and the speed at which history is being rewritten there does not bode well for our freedoms here. We are already seeing dark reflections in the glass. This month the Observer reported how British anti-abortion campaigners are echoing US vice-president JD Vance. He claimed our new buffer zone laws, preventing protests outside abortion clinics, were an attack on the “liberties of religious Britons”, shifting focus away from the reason they were implemented to a debate about freedom of speech.

Buffer zones (intended to protect staff and women using the clinics) are being targeted in a careful campaign by conservative Christian groups such as the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a group that wants to ban abortion, opposes same-sex marriage and, in the US, has helped at least 23 states pass legislation barring trans athletes from girls’ and women’s events as well as drafting legislation restricting gender-affirming treatment for minors. With only 1.4% of adolescents in the US identifying as transgender, LGBTQ+ rights groups accused the ADF of “whipping up a panic” over decisions better left to doctors, teachers and parents.

Defence spending has to go up, but siphoning money from international aid is a self-defeating folly

Shortly before he flew to Washington, Sir Keir Starmer turned up in the Commons, put on his sombre voice and declared: “Everything has changed.” One of the more startling transformations has been to Sir Keir himself. The Labour leader came to office thinking, as did most of those who voted for him, that he was going to be a domestically orientated prime minister with primary ambitions to improve living standards, build lots of homes and rejuvenate public services. That’s what “change”, his one-word election slogan, was supposed to be about. When he originally selected his overriding “five missions”, the defence of the realm didn’t make the cut.

His central definition today is as a geopolitically focused prime minister who is promising to spend more on guns, missiles and warplanes and less on international aid. More British bullets will be purchased at the expense of succour to the impoverished and desperate of the world. This shift gives a flintier profile to his leadership, but not in a way that either supporters or opponents anticipated during last summer’s election. Most Labour people don’t quarrel with the argument that Britain has to put up its guard, but a lot of them, including queasy members of the Starmer cabinet, are wriggling uncomfortably about taking the hatchet to the international development budget. In the days since the decision was announced, they have taken to wondering what manner of Labour government is this?

Defence spending has to go up, but siphoning money from international aid is a self-defeating folly

Shortly before he flew to Washington, Sir Keir Starmer turned up in the Commons, put on his sombre voice and declared: “Everything has changed.” One of the more startling transformations has been to Sir Keir himself. The Labour leader came to office thinking, as did most of those who voted for him, that he was going to be a domestically orientated prime minister with primary ambitions to improve living standards, build lots of homes and rejuvenate public services. That’s what “change”, his one-word election slogan, was supposed to be about. When he originally selected his overriding “five missions”, the defence of the realm didn’t make the cut.

His central definition today is as a geopolitically focused prime minister who is promising to spend more on guns, missiles and warplanes and less on international aid. More British bullets will be purchased at the expense of succour to the impoverished and desperate of the world. This shift gives a flintier profile to his leadership, but not in a way that either supporters or opponents anticipated during last summer’s election. Most Labour people don’t quarrel with the argument that Britain has to put up its guard, but a lot of them, including queasy members of the Starmer cabinet, are wriggling uncomfortably about taking the hatchet to the international development budget. In the days since the decision was announced, they have taken to wondering what manner of Labour government is this?

When funding to support vulnerable countries is withdrawn, the risk of war and global destabilisation increases

National defence and international development are two sides of the same coin. Our long-term security requires us to invest in both. European nations need to fill any vacuum left by America’s new administration as we ensure there can be no victory for Vladimir Putin in Ukraine and Donald Trump’s decision to shut down USAid.

Before being elected as an MP, I lived in Kenya and saw the vital work done by local charities that help families of children growing up in informal settlements on the outskirts of Nairobi. I met teenagers working on social media projects to tackle disinformation and prevent post-election violence. And I talked to women about the ever-present threat of rape and sexual violence.

MPs ask ‘what will be left of Labour programme?’ amid calls for rethink and plan to speak out against decision

• Labour MP Emily Darlington: ‘International aid is as vital as defence spending – cutting either undermines British security’

Keir Starmer is facing a backbench revolt by Labour MPs this week as anger mounts over the government’s decision to cut the international development budget by almost half in order to pay for an increase in defence spending.

The Labour chair of the all-party select committee on international development, Sarah Champion, who has already called on the government to rethink the decision, has secured a debate in the Commons on Wednesday at which dozens of Labour backbenchers are considering intervening to express their dismay.