Markus Andrews

The shadow of “Westminster sleaze” again looms over the Houses of Parliament following the emergence of a fresh spate of lurid allegations about the behaviour of Britain’s elected representatives.An unnamed Conservative MP is reportedly facing suspension from his party after being accused of watching a pornographic video on his smartphone in the Commons in full view of colleagues.Meanwhile, a female Labour MP has claimed she was the made the subject of “vulgar sexual comments” by a member of her own party, casting further light on the casual sexism women in politics face every day following the furore caused by a Mail on Sunday story published over the weekend, in which another unnamed Tory MP made accusations of a sexual nature against Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner.The Sunday Times reported on the same day that 56 MPs, including three Cabinet ministers and two Shadow Cabinet members, were under investigation over claims of sexual misconduct and had been referred to Parliament’s Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme.Of course, this is hardly the first time in living memory that the conduct of Britain’s political leaders has been found wanting – here is an overview of some of the biggest scandals of the last 30 years.A surprising affairThe publication of Conservative MP Edwina Currie’s diaries in 2002 offered the eyebrow-raising revelation that she had had an affair with future Conservative prime minister Sir John Major between 1984 and 1988 when she was a backbencher and he the party’s whip and both were married.David Mellor, aggrieved having himself been forced to resign from Mr Major’s Cabinet in September 1992 over an extramarital affair of his own, observed wryly that history might have been very different if his former boss’s infidelity had become public knowledge while he was still in office.Cash-for-questionsThe phrase “Westminster sleaze” first gained national prominence as a result of the “cash-for-questions” affair in 1994, when Conservative MPs Neil Hamilton and Tim Smith were forced to resign from government jobs after then-Harrods owner Mohamed al-Fayed revealed he had given them money in brown paper envelopes to ask specific questions in the Commons.The scandal also led to the jailing of former defence minister Jonathan Aitken over secret meetings with Saudi representatives and prompted the creation of Lord Nolan’s “seven principles of public life”, which all public officials are now expected to adhere to – selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.‘A moment of madness’Welsh Labour leader Ron Davies, Tony Blair’s secretary of state for Wales, resigned in late October 1998 after he was mugged at knifepoint by a stranger he had met on Clapham Common, south London, having agreed to go for a meal with the man, losing his wallet, mobile phone and keys in the incident in an area then-notorious as a pickup spot.Mr Davies was married at the time but divorced the year after his fall from grace.“It was a moment of madness for which I have subsequently paid a very, very heavy price and I am deeply sorry,” he famously said. “I bitterly regret it.”New Labour resignationsMr Blair served as PM from 1997 to 2007 and was forced to sign off on the resignation of a number of Cabinet ministers for a variety of transgressions, notably his transport secretary Stephen Byers, who reluctantly stepped down in late May 2002 after it emerged that one of his special advisers, Jo Moore, had sent an email on the day of the 9/11 terror attacks on New York City that advised: “It’s now a very good day to get out anything we want to bury.”Peter Mandelson was meanwhile forced to step down twice, first over an undeclared home loan from a fellow minister and, secondly, for allegedly trying to help a donor to the Millennium Dome with a passport application. More

The RSPCA is hailing what it calls “a milestone week” for animal welfare as three new long-fought for animal protection measures become law.The use of glue traps, condemned by campaigners as “crude devices that cause horrific suffering”, will be banned in England – although with two loopholes.One is that selling the traps will still be legal. Humane Society UK said that although the sale of glue traps cannot also be banned unilaterally in England without the same ban in the other three nations of the UK, it would write to retailers in England to urge them to withdraw from sale traps that will no longer be legal to use. The other loophole is that professional pest-controllers will be able to apply for licences to use the traps, which leave rodents, birds and pets suffering stress, exhaustion, dehydration or injuries for hours or days as they struggle to get free.Meanwhile, people who fail to properly care for their pets, zoo animals and livestock could face new fixed-penalty fines of up to £5,000.Under the new legislation, fines could be handed out to pet breeders who fail to microchip puppies before rehoming them, horse owners tethering animals in a way that neglects their basic needs or farmers transporting livestock that are not fit to travel.The fixed-penalty notices are intended to “bridge the gap” between offering advice and prosecution, and the idea is they should reduce pressure on the courts.The police will be able to issue the fines, but not the RSPCA.At the same time, the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill, which also gained Royal Assent, will oblige ministers to take into account the fact that animals experience feelings and emotions when they are making policy decisions.The government sparked controversy when it failed to carry over sentience from EU legislation into UK law after Brexit.A new Animal Sentience Committee made up of experts will be created to hold government to account on how well its decisions have taken account of the welfare of animals, publishing reports that ministers need to respond to in Parliament.Emma Slawinski, of the RSPCA, said: “It’s a good week for animal welfare; the RSPCA has been campaigning on glue traps, animal sentience and fixed penalty notices for a long time.“We are now pressing the government to introduce bans on the import of foie gras and fur, and for it to implement the Kept Animals Bill so that live exports of animals for slaughter, keeping primates as pets and the cruel puppy import trade can also be banned once and for all.”The Kept Animals Bill is due to continue its passage into law via a carryover motion in the next parliamentary session.However, the government appears to have dropped the Animals Abroad Bill, which would have banned the import of foie gras and fur, and banned adverts for cruel animal attractions abroad. More

New research suggests two million older voters who did not vote for Labour in 2019 would consider doing so now. A report from the Fabian Society found 28 per cent of over-55s in Britain were open to voting Labour – compared with a 21 per cent share of the vote among that age group at the last election.Around two million of them said they did not vote for the party when Jeremy Corbyn faced Boris Johnson but would consider doing so under Sir Keir Starmer’s leadership.The Fabian Society, a Labour affiliate, said a YouGov poll found that 32 per cent of people in the older age group thought Labour had moved in the “right direction” under Sir Keir.The same poll found that 28 per cent said the opposite about the party’s direction – a proportion matched among under-55s.The younger age group diverged on support for Sir Keir’s leadership, however, with only 23 per cent of them saying they thought he had taken the party in the “right direction”. The poll was taken from 8-13 December, by which time news had broken of lockdown-breaking parties attended by the prime minister and other Conservatives.Labour has historically struggled with older voters but the gap in support between age groups has grown in recent years. Ipsos Mori’s post-2019 election survey found support for Labour among older voters had plunged to a record low, with just 17 per cent of over-65s and 27 per cent of 55 to 64-year-olds voting for the party.Pundits have argued Labour has no chance of winning the next election – expected late next year or in spring 2024 – without pulling a significantly higher portion of the older vote. This latest research will offer hope. The Fabian Society also held a series of focus groups with over-55 working class voters in England and Wales who had voted for Labour before but backed the Conservatives at the last election – a demographic Labour is desperate to appeal to.The takeaway from the focus groups was “while Labour remains behind in the polls among over-55s, the gap is no longer so large that it is an insurmountable barrier to the party winning the next election”.The results of the Fabian Society’s research will be seen as a strong positive for the party and will likely be taken as vindication of the politically rightwards shift under Sir Keir. More

The record-high numbers of sex crimes recorded by police in England and Wales are likely the “tip of the iceberg”, campaigners have warned.New figures show sexual offences hit their highest level from December 2020 to December 2021 – rising to 183,587 crimes. This is a 22 per cent surge from the year before and an increase of 13 per cent from 2019.The fresh data, released by the Office for National Statistics on Thursday, revealed there was a significant rise in reports of sexual offences after the government loosened lockdown rules.Some 67,125 rapes were reported from December 2020 to December 2021 – meaning rapes made up 37 per cent of the sexual offences recorded. This constitutes a 21 per cent rise from 55,592 reports of rape in the 12 months to December 2020.However, convictions for rape remain at an all-time low, with the prosecution rate nosediving to only 1.3 per cent of recorded rapes in England and Wales earlier in the year.Rebecca Hitchen, of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, told The Independent: “In the last couple of years, we’ve seen high profile cases of violence against women put sexual offences firmly on the public agenda.“This data may therefore reflect greater awareness and inclination to report to the police. However, while around a third of reported rapes relate to domestic abuse it may also be true that the easing of lockdowns and return of socialising led to increased opportunity and impunity with which perpetrators might offend.“What we know is that these figures remain the tip of the iceberg, as reporting does not feel like an option for many women, particularly those who face discrimination on the basis of their race, immigration status, disability, and other characteristics.”Ms Hitchen warned those women coming forward to report rape and sexual assault are being treated like they are the ones who are under investigation instead of being given proper support.She warned the current system “blames and harms them, inappropriately focuses on their ‘credibility’ and in the vast majority of cases, will not bring them justice”.Ms Hitchen added: “This is a national scandal and despite commitments in the government’s Rape Review, nothing is really changing. This latest data from the Office for National Statistics must be a wake-up call to the government that our broken justice system needs a radical overhaul.”Jayne Butler, chief executive of Rape Crisis England and Wales, said the “vast majority” of rapes and sexual assaults are never reported to the police by victims so the rise in people coming forward is “encouraging”.She added: “It is likely these figures reflect a gradual increase in survivors’ willingness to pursue criminal justice rather than an increase in the number of sexual offences being committed.“The figures also reflect the growing number of adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse who are now coming forward.”Ms Butler noted this increase in people reporting sexual offences to the police has gone hand in hand with the “unprecedented levels of need and demand” for her organisation’s specialist Rape Crisis services in recent years.There are currently 12,000 people on Rape Crisis waiting lists, Ms Butler added, as she argued “long-term, sustainable funding” for services which help victims of sexual offences is “more urgently needed than ever”.Emily Hunt, who alleges she was raped in May 2015, told The Independent the rise in sexual offences reports is “fundamentally good news” as it shows people feel able to report to the police.The 42-year-old, who is an independent adviser to the government on the Rape Review, added: “They are not just helping themselves pursue justice. They are helping to stop future rapes. “They deserve our thanks. We know from academic research and from police forces that a lot of rapists are serial offenders. The majority of uncaught rapists go on to do it again. A US study found they rape on average at least 5.8 times in the course of their lives.”Ms Hunt said the suspect-focused investigation model for rape gives her hope as she explained it is changing the way rape is investigated across England and Wales but is still in its “early phases”.She claims she was treated badly by the police when she came forward to allege she had been raped. “I absolutely lived through the victim blaming and shaming from the police,” she said. “The police investigated me and my credibility instead of my attacker.”Ms Hunt claimed she woke up without any clothes in a hotel bed in London next to a man she says she had never seen before.Ms Hunt claimed she was filmed naked without her consent – adding that the police only told her about the naked video of her just over a year after the alleged incident took place. She said her last memory was of having lunch with a family member in a local restaurant five hours earlier, adding that she felt as if she had been drugged and also suspected she had been raped.The man was arrested on suspicion of rape in 2015 but denied the allegations and was not charged because of a lack of evidence.Commenting on the latest figures on sexual offences, Dame Vera Baird QC, victims’ commissioner for England, said: “We know that the majority of victims do not report, and thousands of rapes and sexual assaults take place each year without any sort of criminal justice outcome. Issues with the policing and prosecuting of rape are also well documented.“So, it is somewhat positive to see that victims are not being put off reporting. My hope is that we do not betray these victims’ trust like we have failed so many victims in the past.”Ruth Davison, chief executive of Refuge, the UK’s largest provider of shelters for domestic abuse victims, said the charity “constantly” sees investigations into sexual crimes “re-traumatising survivors”. This results in them either pulling out of cases or not reporting offences in the first place, she added.“A ‘record high’ in sexual offences is a devastating phrase to read,” she added. “Serious action is needed to address not only the rise in offences but the woefully low rate of prosecutions that this and other recent data has shown.”The fresh data released by the Office for National Statistics also revealed a rise in domestic abuse-related offences logged – with researchers discounting fraud crimes.There were 895,782 offences recorded as domestic abuse-related in 2021, which is a 7 per cent rise from the year before.Sarah Davidge, of Women’s Aid, a leading domestic abuse charity, told The Independent: “It is vital to acknowledge that many survivors do not report to the police, meaning this is likely to be the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the scale of domestic abuse in this country.“Less than a fifth of women report to the police so we know the true number of women experiencing abuse is much higher than police recorded data.”Between two and three women are murdered each week by their partners or ex-partners in England and Wales, while one in four women will suffer domestic abuse at some point during their lives. More

Disgraced former Tory Imran Ahmad Khan is expected to formally cease being an MP three weeks after being convicted of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy.Despite announcing his intention to resign on 14 April — three days after being convicted at Southwark Crown Court — Khan only triggered the formal process this week, in a letter to the Treasury.The 48-year-old is not expected to officially leave Parliament until Tuesday when the process is complete, meaning he will receive his full pay for the month. As of April 2022, the annual salary for an MP is £84,144.The Wakefield MP told The Guardian he expected the process to conclude on Saturday, but it is understood it would not happen until the next working day, with Monday being a bank holiday.He also suggested there were delays with his resignation due to HR issues with staff and the Easter bank holiday, but officials stressed than MP can resign at any moment.“MPs can resign at a moment’s notice,” a parliamentary source told the newspaper. “Look at Owen Paterson. He was there one minute and gone the next. MPs choose the date.“There’s a winding-up process for an MP’s office, to do with members of staff who suddenly find themselves without a job, and also to do with the transfer of secure material.“But that is separate to when an MP actually stands down. By waiting until the end of the month it means he will have been paid in full for April”.Khan was expelled from the Conservative Party following his conviction and announced he was stand down two weeks ago — paving the way for a crucial by-election the Wakefield constituency.He said it was “intolerable” for his constituents to “go for months or years” without an MP “who can amplify their voice in Parliament”, as he intends to appeal the verdict that was handed down on 11 April.The Wakefield seat turned blue first time since the 1930s at the 2019 general elections, as Boris Johnson emerged with the biggest Conservative majority for decades, but will be hotly contested in the coming months.Once Khan’s resignation is made official, the date for the vote in Wakefield will be unveiled when the Conservative chief whip moves the “writ” — a motion to elect a new MP, and is typically held between 21 and 27 days afterwards.The Independent has contacted Khan for comment. More

The Conservatives are being accused of failing to act against an MP who watched porn in the Commons, amid doubts over when an inquiry will start – or if it will take place at all.Labour and some Tories demanded to know why the whip has not been stripped from the unnamed MP, after he was identified by two female colleagues for watching the porn on his phone.The Tories have suggested that an independent complaints scheme investigate the controversy, but admitted only witnesses, not third parties, can trigger an inquiry in parliament.One senior Conservative MP told The Independent that “in any other workplace” someone facing such an accusation would be suspended, while a second said the party should “sack him now”.The Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (ICGS) is respected, but – as well as requiring a witness to come forward – can take many months to complete an investigation.The Conservative Party declined to say whether the two female witnesses are satisfied with the ICGS carrying out the inquiry, after a meeting with the chief whip, Chris Heaton-Harris.Caroline Nokes, a former minister, protested that in asking officials in parliament to investigate, instead of taking tough action itself, her party is “kicking it into the long grass”.One Tory MP said they had expected the party to “grasp this with both hands and withdraw the whip from whoever it is immediately”.A vice-chair of the 1922 Committee of backbench Tories revealed it will “work closely with the chief whip to really look into this”, questioning why the MP’s name remains under wraps.“Take a very, very long, hard look at yourself, look into your soul. And ask yourself, should I still be here?” Nickie Aiken said on Times Radio.And Keir Starmer demanded to know why the Conservatives are stalling, when the offending MP’s identity is known to the party’s whips’ office.“This is an unusual case because the Tory party knows who this individual is,” the Labour leader said, on the local elections campaign trail in Cumbria.“I think that they should deal with it and deal with it sooner rather than later and take appropriate action.”The Independent has been told that some male Conservatives have questioned the seriousness of the offence, suggesting the MP might have “opened an email inadvertently and there was porn in it”.However, one of the complainants, a minister, has said it was not a quick incident and the man appeared to be aware he had been seen, yet continued to watch the porn.A second female Tory MP said she had also seen the man watching pornography. She is believed to have attempted to film him as proof of what he was doing.Government sources have suggested the man in question is a backbencher, not a minister, acknowledging his identity is known.The Tuesday night meeting at which the allegation emerged was attended by some of the most senior women in the Conservative Party, including Theresa May and some current ministers.The Independent has been told that the “united view of the meeting is that this MP should be suspended by the party”.Pressure also came from within the government, including from the attorney general Suella Braverman as she warned a minority of men in politics “behave like animals”.“The whip should be removed,” if the case is proven, Ms Braverman said, adding: “I am ashamed that this person is carrying the Conservative rosette.“I think they really do need to be subjected to a recall and be no longer holding that privileged position as a member of parliament.”Speaking in Burnley, Boris Johnson called the alleged behaviour “obviously unacceptable” – but insisted a referral to the ICGS was the correct action to take.“What needs to happen now is that the proper procedures need to be gone through, the independent complaints and grievances procedure needs to be activated and we need to get to understand the facts,” he said.The ICGS will also not confirm or deny if an investigation gets under way, because it “operates on the basis of absolute confidentiality”. More

The Independent has revealed that Sajid Javid used an offshore trust while working as an MP in the heart of the Treasury – and did not declare it in the register of members’ interests.But what exactly are the rules about which financial interests MPs do and don’t have to declare?Elected members of parliament have to submit a register of interests within one month of their election – and the regulations are complicated, covering ten different categories.The most obvious category is employment and earnings. Any payments over £100 they receive from outside parliament must be registered; payments of less than £100 must also be registered if that person pays them regularly.The rules are clear that this includes “salaries, fees and payments in kind; gifts received in recognition of services performed”, as well as “taxable expenses, allowances and benefits such as company cars”, and redundancy payments. A separate category exists for donations and other support for their activities as an MP or their local political parties. This means loans, financial support, and payment in kind like use of events spaces or training. CaGifts, benefits and hospitality from sources both in the UK and abroad are covered, as are visits outside the UK, “where the cost is over £300 if that cost is not wholly borne by the Member or by UK public funds”.MPs also have to declare any land and property they own which “has a value of more than £100,000 or forms part of a total property portfolio whose value exceeds £100,000”. However, homes which are “used wholly for their own personal residential purposes, or those of their spouse, partner or dependent children” are excluded.There are also separate categories for shareholdings: anything over £70,000 or which any holdings which amount to more than 15 per cent of shares.And certain family members are covered too: any family member who gets more than £700 in parliamentary funding must be declared publicly. Family members who are engaged in lobbying the public sector must also be noted in the register.So where might Sajid Javid’s offshore trust sit? In the miscellaneous “category 8”. The rules for this category say members must declare “any relevant financial interest or material benefit which does not clearly fall into one of the other categories, including any shareholding which falls below the relevant threshold, or any other financial asset, including an asset held in trust”.But the rules for this category say a declaration must be made if the member “considers that it meets the test of relevance; in other words, that it might reasonably be thought by others to influence his or her actions or words as a Member”.It seems that Javid ought to have thought that: as James Murray, shadow financial secretary to the Treasury told The Independent: “If Sajid Javid held money in an offshore trust while he was part of the Treasury, it would raise further questions about decision making in this government.” More

A total of 200 local authorities across Britain are holding elections on Thursday 5 May, with every council seat in London up for grabs.Many of the seats being contested were up for election four or five years ago, when Theresa May was the prime minister and Jeremy Corbyn was leader of the Labour party. With a very different political landscape this time around, the elections will be a verdict on Boris Johnson and Sir Keir Starmer, taking in issues such as Covid-19 and the cost of living.The votes will also capture Londoners views on local councils attempts to make the city greener, cleaner and more pleasant with active travel measures such as bike lanes and low traffic neighbourhoods. There are several councils to watch, including Barnet, Labour’s top target in London for the third election in a row. The party failed narrowly to win control in 2014, while 2018 saw the council swing further towards the Conservatives. Labour needs to gain nine seats to form a majority. More