Markus Andrews

Grassroots aid destined for Ukraine is spending day stuck in lorries at the port of Dover because of Brexitborder checks.Charity workers say that five tonnes of donations are still in the UK because of confusion over paperwork.Britain’s exit from the EU single market and customs union caused a dramatic rise in bureaucracy for imports and exports between Britain and the EU.The red tape is now making it harder to send supplies to help in the wake of the Russian invasion, where the UN says need is “growing at an alarming pace”. According to the UN’s humanitarian assistance office as of Monday there are now 12 million people in need in the country and a $1 billion (£760 million) shortfall in funding.Over the weekend UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for a cease fire to allow the passage of life-saving humanitarian aid to those encircled by Russian forces in the country.But some aid sent from the UK is getting stuck even closer to home because of Brexit delays.Agnieszka Lokaj, who runs the Lewisham Polish Centre in south London, told the PoliticsHome website that despite mounting donations, “we are not exporting”.”I don’t want to send drivers to the border where they will be stuck for several days. It doesn’t make sense to spend so much time and money dealing with the bureaucracy,” she said.Last month lorry queues of up to six miles (10km) into the port of Dover we’re recorded by Highways England – from the Roundhill Tunnel to the Western Heights Roundabout HMRC, which oversees customs and other regulatory checks on goods crossing the border, recommended that people donate to the UN’s Disasters Emergency Committee as the best way of helping the country.Since 1 January 2022 lorries have had to use the Goods Vehicle Movement System (GVMS) to get through customs at the port. The new governemnt IT system deals with customs, transit and security declarations needed to cross the Channel.Before this year goods could be exported and paperwork dealt with afterwards, but this grace period has now elapsed. Even lorries with the right paperwork – which is complicated and often filled in by specialists rather than the lorry drivers themselves, are taking 15 minutes to clear the border. Those without the right paperwork or where an error has been made are not allowed through.”The UK has committed a £120 million humanitarian aid package for Ukraine to help aid agencies respond to the deteriorating situation, creating a lifeline for Ukrainians with access to basic necessities and medical supplies,” a spokesperson for the organisation said. “Our humanitarian aid takes the UK’s overall aid support for Ukraine during the current crisis to £220 million, after a £100 million economic package for Ukraine was announced earlier this month”. The Independent has approached HMRC for further comment. More

Former Commons speaker John Bercow has been handed a lifetime ban for holding a parliamentary pass after an inquiry concluded he was a “serial bully”.In a damning report, the Independent Expert Panel (IEP) upheld 21 allegations against Mr Bercow across three complainants, saying the behaviour “had no place in any workplace”.Mr Bercow’s conduct was “so serious that he should never be allowed a pass to the Parliamentary estate; and that if he were still a MP it would have recommended expelling him from the House”, it said.He now becomes the second former MP to have the privilege of retaining a pass to the parliamentary estate revoked for life after the ex-Labour MP Keith Vaz faced a similar sanction in 2019.The IEP was tasked with producing its 89-page report after Mr Bercow appealed the conclusions of an inquiry by Kathryn Stone – the parliamentary commissioner for standards.The commissioner had upheld 21 allegations from three former parliamentary staff relating to events between 2009 and 2015, including verbal abuse, displays of anger and “undermining behaviour” against his secretary Angus Sinclair.Ms Stone also upheld allegations made by Ms Kate Emms, a current member of the House staff, who had claimed Mr Bercow mimicked her, created an “intimidating and hostile environment”, and was responsible for “intimidating, insulting behaviour involving an abuse of power” towards her.Mr Bercow, who stood down as Commons speaker in 2019 and denies the accusations, has previously denounced the investigation as “materially flawed” and hit out a the “amateurish and unjust process”.But the IEP sub-panel chaired by Sir Stephen Irwin said: “The findings of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, which we have upheld, show that the respondent has been a serial bully. “Like many bullies, he had those whom he favoured and those whom he made victims. His evidence in the investigations, the findings of the Commissioner, and his submissions to us, show also that the respondent has been a serial liar.“His behaviour fell very far below that which the public has a right to expect from any Member of Parliament.It added: “The ICGS Bullying and Harassment Policy was breached repeatedly and extensively by the most senior Member of the House of Commons.“In all, 21 separate allegations were proved and have been upheld. The House may feel that his conduct brought the high office of Speaker into disrepute.“This was behaviour which had no place in any workplace. Members of staff in the House should not be expected to have to tolerate it as part of everyday life.”In a further statement today, the former MP Mr Bercow said: “Parliament is supposed to be the highest court in the land. This inquiry, which lasted a ghastly 22 months at great cost to the taxpayer, has failed dismally.“At the end of, the panel has simply said that I should be denied a parliamentary pass which I have never applied for an do not want. That is the absurdity of its position. Don’t fall for the establishment spin that I have been banned for life.“I can still attend debates with the help of a friendly pass-holder or go as a member of the public.”The former Commons speaker added: “All I can say is that the case against me would have been thrown out by any court in the land since it is based on the flimsiest of evidence, rooted in hearsay and baseless rumour, and advanced by old school dogmatists once intent on resisting change at all costs and now settling some ancient scores with me.“Add to that a dash of personal spite and you have some idea of the vengeful vendetta mounted against me. It is a travesty of justice and brings shame on the House of Commons.Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA union which represents senior civil servants, said bullying had “flourished unchallenged” under John Bercow.“No remorse, no contrition and willing to sacrifice the first independent process that investigates complaints, simply to save his own reputation,” he added.Downing Street added that it hopes the finding that Mr Bercow was guilty of bullying staff will encourage others at Westminster who suffer harassment to come forward.A No 10 spokesman said: “The prime minister has spoken before about the fact that there is no place for bullying or harassment in Parliament, and MPs should always be held to the highest standards.“We hope that today’s decision gives all those in Westminster the confidence to come forward and report their cases, and that they will be fairly heard.”In 2019, after leaving Parliament, Mr Bercow was nominated for a peerage by the former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, but it was ultimately blocked due to the investigation into bullying allegations. In 2021, the former Tory MP also defected to the Labour Party, and branded the Conservatives “reactionary, populist, nationalistic and sometimes even xenophobic”. More

Ukraine refugees trapped in Calais will have to make a 70-mile journey to Lille to apply for visas to reach the UK, No 10 has insisted.Downing Street ruled out a U-turn, despite mounting pressure for an application centre to be set up in the Channel port town, where nearly 300 refugees have gathered.On Monday, Priti Patel – who wrongly told MPs there is help available in Calais – suggested a new centre would be established close to the town, saying it would be “en route”.But Boris Johnson’s spokesperson said the application centre would be in Lille, where it would be will be set up “in the coming days”.Asked what Ukrainians in Calais should do, No 10 pointed to “a helpline in place” and to “facilities and staff in neighbouring countries to Ukraine”.France has condemned the UK’s “lack of humanity”, after women and children in Calais were told to travel back to Paris to apply for visas giving permission to cross the Channel.But Ms Patel, the home secretary, appeared to argue an application centre in Calais would help people smugglers, by creating “choke points”.“We have set up a bespoke VAC [visa application centre] en route to Calais. but away from the port because we have to prevent that surge from taking place,” she said, on Monday.Now it has emerged that the “en route” application centre will actually be in Lille – a 70-mile journey from Calais, rather than near the town.In the Commons, Yvette Cooper, the shadow home secretary, protested that Ms Patel had told MPs the centre was open – but “it still doesn’t exist”.She also warned that the Brussels centre is open only three days a week, while the next available appointment at the centre in Paris is on 15 March – one week away.Caroline Nokes, a Conservative MP and former Home Office minister, poured scorn on ministerial claims to be moving “at pace”, protesting: “Snails also move at pace”.Warning there is no date for a promised sponsorship scheme to start, she added: “Those people coming forward with generous offers are advising their UK friends to apply for visitor visas.“What of those who do not have passports? What of those children who are completely undocumented?”Answering an urgent question on the crisis, the Home Office minister Kevin Foster refused to say if the sponsorship scheme would take “weeks or months” to get underway.Answering an urgent question on the crisis, the Home Office minister Kevin Foster suggested the sponsorship scheme would take “weeks” rather than “months” to get underway.Asked why the application centre will be in Lille, the No 10 spokesman said: “We obviously want to make sure that we can provide the appropriate level of support that those who are seeking to enter the UK require.“Obviously, the Home Office and Border Force are best placed to make a call on where that would be best based to help support those people who are making their way through France.” More

The Home Office has been condemned for “dirty propaganda” after appearing to protest that Ireland’s welcome for Ukraine refugees is a security threat to the UK.Dublin is expected to admit 100,000 refugees from the invasion, after joining the rest of the EU in easing visa rules – which the UK has refused to do, triggering chaos and mounting criticism.The Home Office is already under fire for a series of false claims about its hardline stance, including that is offering help to people stranded in Calais without visas when there is none.Now the UK is reported to have raised concerns about Ireland’s liberal policy, claiming Ukrainians will be able to travel on to the UK without biometric checks because of the common travel area (CTA).“Ireland has basically opened the door to everyone in Ukraine, which creates a problem due to the CTA,” a government source told The Daily Telegraph.“We’ve seen before with migrants from Albania that they have come through Dublin, into Belfast and across to the mainland to Liverpool. That’s created a drug cartel route.”But it was quickly pointed out that the visa-free common travel area only applies to UK and Irish citizens, not to migrants from other countries.Simon Cox, a barrister at the Doughty Street Chambers firm, attacked the claim that refugees would not face security checks – which Ireland has said will be carried out after arrival.“Home Office anonymous dirty propaganda. Ireland has security checks on Ukrainians arriving without visas. Just as UK has for French people arriving without visas,” he tweeted.Donald Tusk, the former president of the European Council, poured scorn on Boris Johnson’s claim of being “very, very generous” to refugees.“Solidarity in action. The UK has granted 50 visas to the Ukrainian refugees while the Poles have welcomed 1.2 million Ukrainians in two weeks,” he tweeted.That number has now increased from 50 to 300, but it represents just 3.4 per cent of the 18,900 applications for visas made so far.Meanwhile, officials in Calais have reported that almost 300 Ukrainians attempting to reach the UK have been turned away and told to go to Paris or Brussels to apply.There is no Home Office team in Calais – despite Priti Patel telling the Commons on Monday that “we have staff in Calais, we have support on the ground”.The home secretary sparked confusion by saying she is “investigating the legal options to create a humanitarian route” – but appeared to be talking about a scheme, already promised, for firms and individuals to sponsor refugees.The UK is allowing family members to join Ukrainians already in this country, but has refused to copy the EU in offering asylum to all Ukrainians for three years.Jeremy Hunt is leading a group of nearly 40 Tory MPs who have signed a letter calling on the prime minister to “provide a more generous system for those fleeing the war”He said: “1.7 million people have now fled and no one could possibly argue they don’t have good cause.” More

European Union officials on Tuesday defended the 27-nation bloc’s decision to ban Russian state-controlled media outlets from broadcasting in the region as decisive steps to check a Kremlin-led “information war.”Speaking at the European Parliament during a debate on foreign interference and disinformation, the EU’s top diplomat Josep Borrell brushed off critics who say the EU is threatening freedom of information with the ban on Sputnik and RT/Russia Today.“They are not independent media, they are assets, they are weapons, in the Kremlin’s manipulation ecosystem,” Borrell told lawmakers. “We are not trying to decide what is true and what is false. We don’t have ministers of the Truth. But we have to focus on foreign actors who intentionally, in a coordinated manner, try to manipulate our information environment.” The EU has decided to suspend the broadcasting activities of Sputnik and RT/Russia Today in the bloc until Russia ends its war in Ukraine and stop disinformation campaigns in member states.Borrell said Moscow-controlled outlets are part of a well-oiled propaganda machine providing biased news about Vladimir Putin’s true intentions.“If the information is bad, democracy is bad,” he said, adding that information should be a protected good. “If the information is systematically contaminated by lies and twisted, citizens can’t have a clear understanding of reality and their political judgment is similarly twisted.” Borrell insisted that Sputnik was created by a presidential decree with the aim of reporting on Russia’s sate policies abroad, and said that Russia Today is capable of conducting an “information war” against the western world. Borrell said he will soon propose a new mechanism that will allow the EU to sanction disinformation actors. Lawmakers from the special committee on foreign interference and disinformation are also proposing to establish a sanctions regime to deal with foreign meddling.MEP Sandra Kalniete, the author of the report, said it’s crucial for the EU to counter foreign threats in a bid to prevent third countries damaging democracies.“Let’s call a spade a spade. Russia, China and other authoritarian regimes have funneled more than $300 million into 33 countries to interfere in democratic processes,” she said. “Putin’s propaganda machinery wasn’t just switched on on 24 February. It has already been working in Europe for decades, attempting to poison and divide our societies.”Kaniete said online platforms and tech companies need to suspend all social accounts engaged in “denying, glorifying and justifying Putin’s aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity.”She also proposed to reinforce content in Russian and Ukrainian to resist the pressure from Russia’s disinformation.“In short, any tech platform giving space to Putin’s propaganda or complying with his censorship request is an accomplice to Putin’s aggression,” she said.European Commission Vera Jourova said Putin wants his people to be “apathetic” and praised streaming platform Netflix’s decision to suspend its Russian services.“Because president Putin wants the people to be entertained, not to pay attention to what is happening,” she said. “It would not be right to see Russians being entertained, and next door Ukrainians being killed.” Both Borrell and Jourova expressed deep concerns about the imposed censorship in Russia that threatens independent journalists with jail terms and deprives citizens access to verified information about what their government is doing in Ukraine.“It is more important than ever to reach the Russian people, and provide them with information,” Jourova said. “Every possible channel should be used.” More

The government is planning to dispose of mountains of unusable medical equipment by burning over 500 lorryloads of it a month, the Department of Health has admitted.Ministers wasted £8.7 billion on inadequate personal protective equipment (PPE) during the early stages of the coronavirus pandemic – with vast quantities of shields, gowns, and other items not meeting basic medical standards. Many were bought under the so-called “fast-track” lane where companies with links to Tory ministers were handed lucrative contracts with limited checks.Now in a parliamentary committee hearing on Monday, Department of Health chiefs said they were planning to dispose of 15,000 pallets of equipment a month by burning it as fuel to generate electricity.The monthly 576 lorryloads destined for the incinerator will gradually chip away at the 5.5 billion pieces of useless equipment currently sitting in stockpiles.That approach is likely to be supplemented by plans to recycle some of the waste and turn it into bin bags, food trays, and NHS bedsheets, officials have said.But Jonathan Marron, the Department of Health and Social Care’s director general of office for health improvement and disparities, told MPs that “more traditional waste disposal methods” would also be needed.Like the manufacture of the equipment, its burning will also be done by private companies working on contract, he told a hearing of the Public Accounts Committee.”We’re currently appointing to what are called lead waste partners, commercial firms who do this as their business who will help us recycle and we’re also exploring using … waste to provide power,” Mr Marron said. “The recycling, we will we have done some will do more. We will also need to use more traditional waste disposal methods, largely using burning it to generate heat and energy. Asked how much could be burnt, he said: “We’re currently working on a plan to have 15,000 pallets a month, push through that approach, exactly how much we’ll do rather depends on how long we continue to use PPE for Covid.” He noted that one lorry could move around 26 pallets, meaning the department is targeting around 576 lorryloads a month for incineration.Official figures show £12.1 billion was spent on PPE in the first year of the pandemic from April 2020 to April 2021, with a total of £8.7billion of that wasted. The government says it was in a rush to procure supplies of equipment however it could at a time of national emergency and global shortage.Labour shadow health secretary Wes Streeting described the revelations as “unbelievable”. “Rishi Sunak is literally burning through taxpayers’ money,” he said.“At the same time as hiking up taxes on working people, the Conservative Government is setting fire to the unusable PPE on which they wasted £8.7 billion of public funds. The Conservatives’ promise to get value for taxpayers’ money has gone up in flames.” More

The government has rejected replacing Buckingham Palace guards’ bearskin hats with “faux fur”, claiming the alternatives do not look right and are too uncomfortable.The Ministry of Defence says it has tested four different types of synthetic fur for use on the iconic military caps, but that none of them are good enough.It comes as around 50,000 people have signed a parliamentary petition urging the government to switch to an alternative which does not involve killing bears to make hats.Animal rights and anti-cruelty groups say alternatives are available – and are much more humane than skinning animals. Campaigners said the government’s claims about the skins were “cynical and misleading” and that the MoD had “actively thwarted” attempts to find a replacement. But Jeremy Quin, the minister of state for defence procurement, said fake fur does not “meet the required standard for the Queen’s Guards ceremonial caps”.The Ministry of Defence says it has tested four different types of synthetic fur since 2015, assessing the hats in laboratory tests in the five areas of “water absorption, penetration, appearance, drying rate and compression”. The hats would also have to be judged to meet the same standards “for shape and comfort for a parade length of duty”.The defence minister Mr Quin said that while newer synthetic hats performed well in wet conditions, the MoD was concerned that they might not be breathable enough or maintain their shape well.He also said even the best-performing alternatives “performed poorly on the visual assessment”, meaning the Ministry of Defence judged that they looked bad.Fur for the guardsmen’s hats is currently procured from Canada, where around 20,000 wild black bears are killed every year as part of a regular cull.The issue of replacing the bearskin caps was reportedly among objections raised in Boris Johnson’s Cabinet against a a general ban on fur imports – which has now been shelved.Claire Bass, executive director of Humane Society International told The Independent: “At a time when most of the British population rejects the cruelty of the fur trade, and after the Queen herself made the decision not to buy any new furs, the Ministry of Defence’s determination to keep using Canadian black bears for guards’ hats looks very out of touch.”She said humane alternatives made by Stella McCartney and top faux furrier Ecopel reportedly “met all the requirements given by the MoD, including passing the MoD’s water shedding test”.And she warned: “Canada allows awful cruelties to be inflicted on black bears, including hunters using bows and arrows and even spears. The Queen’s guards are a symbol of ceremonial pride, but there is nothing remotely majestic about inflicting lingering painful deaths on bears. We urge the MoD to move with the times and go faux.”Sonul Badiani-Hamment, UK director at animal welfare charity FOUR PAWS UK, said the MoD’s objections were “unjustifiable”. She told The Independent: “In a day and age when huge strides are being made to improve animal welfare, it is shameful that animals are still being slaughtered for an item that can be easily replaced with artificial fur.”Elisa Allen, director of animal rights charity Peta said: “The Ministry of Defence is taking the British public and Parliament for fools by falsely claiming nothing short of real bearskins will do for the Queen’s Guard’s caps. “The idea that a viable faux fur is unattainable for ornamental headgear – when the world’s most celebrated and accomplished designers have all ditched real fur in favour of faux – is utter nonsense and insults our intelligence.”Ms Allen said the MoD had “assured Peta that it would do a trial run of any suitable faux fur we developed” but that “instead, it has been actively thwarting attempts to replace the bearskins used for the caps with a humane equivalent”. Ms Allen added: “The high-performing faux fur, created by PETA and world-renowned faux furrier ECOPEL, is the exact length of real bear fur and is waterproof to the MoD’s standards. “Tests conducted by the ministry’s own accredited laboratory show that the fabric looks like and performs in a remarkably similar way to real bear fur. “The MoD’s cynical and misleading responses to the proposed use of faux fur for the Queen’s Guard’s caps must be challenged. When we reach 100,000 signatures on our government petition, we’ll force a parliamentary debate on the issue, restoring power to the British public to demand a modern, humane alternative that would save taxpayer money and spare bears’ lives.”In a written answer to a question by Labour MP Rachel Maskell, the minister Mr Quin said: “There is currently no faux fur alternatives that meet the required standard for the Queen’s Guards ceremonial caps.”Bears are never hunted to order for use by the Ministry of Defence (MOD). Our suppliers source pelts made available by the Canadian authorities following a licensed cull as part of a programme to manage the wild bear population. Where appropriate the MoD uses faux fur alternatives for ceremonial wear, providing they meet the specific user requirements.”In order for an alternative fabric to be considered for use in the ceremonial caps, it would need successfully he perform in the following five areas: water absorption, penetration, appearance, drying rate and compression. “In addition to passing initial laboratory tests, any new fabric would have to gain user approval for shape and comfort for a parade length of duty. This would assess whether the fabric could maintain its shape over time and whether it is comfortable and safe for the user. For example ensuring any waterproof backing is breathable and whether the alternative fabric is waterproof after the shaping, sewing and perforation during production. Consideration would also be given to its sustainability compared to the current natural fur fabric.”The minister added: “There have been four synthetic furs tested since 2015. The artificial fur tested in 2018 failed in all five areas. Tests conducted in 2019 and 2020 on another two samples showed that, while the water penetration was reduced, it still did not meet the necessary standard. “It also performed poorly in the remaining areas. The most recent test results, provided by PETA, have also been analysed. The analysis concluded that the fabric only met one of the five basic requirements necessary to be considered as a viable alternative for ceremonial caps. “While it met the basic standard for water penetration, it showed unacceptable rates of water shedding and performed poorly on the visual assessment. Results for the artificial fur’s drying rate and compression were not presented. More

Boris Johnson’s government is drawing up fresh legislation to crack down on “dirty money” held by Russian oligarchs because the bill being pushed through parliament won’t be enough, the home secretary has said.MPs passed the Economic Crime Bill on Monday evening, after planned reforms moved up the government’s list of priorities following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It will now be scrutinised by the House of Lords.However, Priti Patel revealed there would be a second, “follow-on” Economic Crime Bill in the next parliament session because ministers “cannot get all the measures in right now”.It comes as the government vowed to stick to a six-month time limit for a new register of overseas entities, despite Labour claims it would give Russian oligarchs a “get out of London free” card.Sir Keir Starmer’s party said the government’s plan would still give oligarchs linked to Russia too long to move money out of the UK, urging the government to bring the time limit down to just 28 days.With the unamended bill having passed on Monday evening, lawyers are set to be given six months to record who ultimately benefits from the asset ownership of property and land that is registered. If they do not, it will be frozen and cannot be sold or rented out.Ms Patel said the move will give the UK government “greater power and information to identify and investigate the illicit wealth of Russian criminals, their allies and their proxies”.But the home secretary conceded there would have to be another bill “with further measures” because “we simply cannot get all the measures in right now”. She added: “We’ve focused on the ones that will have the greatest impact and the greatest enablement.”Ms Patel said the second bill will “prevent the abuse of limited partnerships” and give the government “new powers to seize crypto assets from criminals”, as well as measures to give businesses more confidence to share information on suspected money laundering.“We’re already drafting that legislation, and it will be brought forward as soon as we’re able to and can get time in the House,” she said.Conservative MP David Davis also tried to push the government to go further – proposing an amendment that would help allow the government to pre-emptively freeze of assets of individuals in cases under “review”, rather than wait until sanctions are imposed.Mr Davis said: “This bill should be targeting the Russian government and Putin and his henchmen themselves … We should not kid ourselves, this is not an economic crime bill, it’s an economic warfare bill and it’s a war liberal democracies cannot afford to lose.”However, the government signalled it would not support the senior Tory backbencher’s amendment, despite significant cross-party support.Business minister Paul Scully said the government was unlikely to accept any backbench or Labour amendments, but may revisit them when the bill moves to the House of Lords.The government’s own amendments to the bill should help allow the UK to slap sanctions on individuals who have already been hit by EU or US sanctions, and reduce human rights protections in the sanctions regime.Another part of the bill going through parliament will tie the government to publishing an annual report on the use of unexplained wealth orders (UWOs), which allow law agencies to confiscate criminal assets.Branding the Russian president a “gangster”, Ms Patel insisted that the government was working to “root out the dirty money in our economy and importantly to hobble Putin and his cronies”.Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper told MPs Labour would help “speed through” the Economic Crime Bill, but insisted “many of those measures” should have happened years ago.Earlier on Monday, Mr Johnson told a Downing Street press conference the Economic Crime Bill will “whip aside the veil of anonymity” used to obscure ownership of oligarchs’ mansions.“You can no longer use a bogus company to conceal your ownership of a property,” the prime minister said. The bill now moves to the Lords for further consideration before it gets passed into law later in March. More