Markus Andrews

A Labour MP repeatedly refused to withdraw a description of senior Conservatives as “dodgy”, claiming no other word suffices for “the level of corruption and what we have seen from the government”.In a heated Commons row, Zarah Sultana refused three times to take back her attack on the Tories after she accused transport secretary Grant Shapps and fellow cabinet minister Jacob Rees-Mogg of being “dodgy”.Ms Sultana was referring to a report which claimed Mr Shapps set up a departmental unit that lobbied against building on airfields – denied by government – and Mr Rees-Mogg’s role in the botched plan to rewrite disciplinary rules.Interjecting, deputy speaker Dame Eleanor Laing told the Labour MP for Coventry South she did not like the word “dodgy”, adding: “Perhaps she could put it in different words.”But Ms Sultana then refused three times to withdraw it – claiming at one point to be “confused” by the deputy speaker’s request because she could not think of a more suitable term.“I don’t think another word suffices the level of corruption and what we have seen from this government, so I think that term suffices,” said the Labour MP.Raising her voice, Dame Eleanor said: “Order! Order! She misunderstands me. I am asking her to withdraw the word ‘dodgy’. I have given her the opportunity to put her question in other words. If she doesn’t want to take that opportunity, she doesn’t have to.”“I won’t withdraw the remarks,” said Ms Sultana, who declined to re-ask her question to Mr Rees-Mogg with “moderate language”.Meanwhile, Mr Rees-Mogg compared Sir Keir Starmer to a “scuttling beetle” for branding Boris Johnson a “coward” on Twitter – after the Labour leader was forced to withdraw his jibe in the Commons on Wednesday.The Commons leader said: “To have to withdraw in this House and then scuttle out like a beetle and tweet it is, I think, utterly disrespectful to this House and not the sort of cross-party leadership that one might expect.”Rebuking the leader of the opposition, Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said: “Coward is not what is used in this House – and I’m sure that the leader of the opposition will withdraw it.”Sir Keir responded: “I withdraw it – but he’s no leader,” before tweeting the insult.Earlier this year Labour MP Dawn Butler was told to leave the Commons after she refused to withdrawn her claim that Mr Johnson has “lied to the House and the country over and over again”.Ms Butler was ordered to leave the House for the rest of the day, since it is not parliamentary etiquette to call another member a liar. More

Boris Johnson’s pledge to build 40 new hospitals by 2030 has hit fresh trouble after being judged “unachievable” by a watchdog.The project – already dogged by criticism that most schemes are refurbishments, rather than new buildings – has been given a “red” rating by the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA).It means there are “major issues with project definition, schedule, budget, quality and/or benefits delivery, which at this stage do not appear to be manageable or resolvable”.Sources told the Health Service Journal that the IPA carried out two reviews of the programme in the last six months, the latest review – completed this autumn – resulting in the “red” rating.The IPA’s 2020-21 annual report gave it an “amber/red” ranking, which meant the successful delivery of the project was “in doubt”, but the forecast had now worsened.The department of health and social care acknowledged the “red” rating and has been asked to respond to fears that the pledge – a key part of the 2019 Conservative election campaign – appears doomed.Labour pointed to the revelation emerging one day after Mr Johnson “sneaked out social care changes” that will force poorer pensioners to pay higher care bills.“We learn the government’s own Infrastructure and Projects Authority is warning the Tory promise to deliver 40 new hospitals is now ‘unachievable’,” said Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary.“From failing to stamp out corruption, betraying the north over rail and now more broken promises over health and care, the Tories simply can’t be trusted to deliver any of their promises.”The promise of 40 hospitals came under fire almost immediately, when the bill was put at as high as £24bn – while the Tories refused to specify the cost or where the money would come from.It then emerged that, of the 40 projects, the majority were not in fact new hospitals but were rebuilding projects on existing sites, or the addition of extra units.Last summer, it was revealed that health bosses had been ordered to ensure that any such building scheme “must always be referred to as a new hospital”.The instruction was contained within instructions sent to NHS trusts called the New Hospital Programme Communications Playbook, also leaked to HSJ.Sajid Javid, the health secretary, was embarrassed when he said he was looking forward to opening a “new” hospital – when the cancer care centre had been planned before Mr Johnson’s 2019 pledge.The HSJ also reported that the Cabinet Office has drafted in a former transport infrastructure chief in Australia to speed up the programme. More

No 10 has backed away from its plans for limiting MPs’ second jobs after they were rubbished by the head of the Commons committee in charge of the controversy.In a major U-turn on Tuesday, Boris Johnson suddenly proposed curbing outside work to “within reasonable limits” – ministers then suggesting a limit on either hours or earnings.But Chris Bryant, the chair of the Commons standards committee – which will draw up firm proposals for a vote – called the ideas “for the birds” and said they would not work.In response, the prime minister’s spokesman claimed Mr Bryant’s criticisms were targeting an issue that was “not something that we proposed”.Mr Johnson was “not putting forward a set of proposals for parliament to follow”, he said, adding: “That obviously wouldn’t be right. This is something we want to be delivered on a cross party basis.”In fact, trade secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan did propose a limit in hours – suggesting 15-20 a week – while Dominic Raab, the deputy prime minister, backed a cap on earnings.In his criticisms – known to be shared by many Conservative backbenchers – Mr Bryant asked “how on earth” the parliamentary standards commissioner could police such rules.“Every MP should throw themself heart and soul into the business of being an MP,” the Labour MP said.“The whole idea that it’s going to be very easy to come up with some plan in the next few days which says ‘you can do so many hours doing this and so many hours doing that’ is just for the birds, frankly.”On Wednesday, MPs backed the plans to ban MPs working as parliamentary advisers or consultants, as well as restricting outside work to “reasonable limits”.However, Labour abstained – arguing the crackdown did not go far enough – suggesting they would not form the basis for a cross-party deal, even before Mr Bryant’s intervention.The second strand, the ban on parliamentary consultancy, is also in question, after some Conservative MPs told The Independent it would not apply to them.It’s likely that most of the 48 Tories with consultancy jobs will argue that their outside work is commercial and does not involve advice on parliamentary procedure or votes.Mr Bryant warned: “I don’t know what counts as a non-parliamentary duty,” questioning whether that might include knocking on doors in an election, or travelling to a constituency.The standards committee, which includes Tory MPs and independent lay members, will publish an initial report later this month, before a final report at the start of next year.Mr Johnson’s spokesman called it a “misunderstanding” to interpret Mr Bryant’s comments as a criticism “of what the prime minister put forward”.He said: “The committee for standards in public life put forward a set of proposals. What the prime minister did is highlight two which he thought were a viable basis for detailed proposals, further work to be done on a cross party basis.“And that’s now what we’d like to happen.” More

Northern transport bosses have branded the government’s rail plan “woefully inadequate” and “second class”.Transport Secretary Grant Shapps unveiled the long-awaited Integrated Rail Review on Thursday – confirming reports that he would not build a promised high-speed rail line between Manchester and Leeds.The government is also cancelling the Leeds leg of HS2 which would have linked the East Midlands with west Yorkshire. Under the cheaper revised plans for both railways, trains will run on upgraded existing lines – which will not boost capacity or cut journey times by the same degree.“Today’s announcement is woefully inadequate,” said Louise Gittins, Interim Chair of Transport for the North.”After decades of underfunding, the rail network in the North is not fit for purpose. It is largely twin-track Victorian infrastructure trying to cope with the demands of a 21st Century economy.”Ms Gittens said it was “time for the North to have its fair share”, adding: “Leaders from across the North and from across the party political divide came together to ask for a network that would upgrade the North for this century and in line with the rest of the country. “Our statutory advice asked for an over £40 billion network but the Government has decided to provide even less than half of that.”Meanwhile Henri Morison, director of the Northern Powerhouse partnership business group, said the the “lack of a full new line across the Pennines will dramatically reduce the capacity and potential for rapid economic growth”.”What Northern leaders had proposed was an economically transformational vision. What we have is, as ever, second class,” he said, adding that the “complete failure to deliver the Eastern leg of HS2 in the North” was a “a major blow”. Under the plans, which were only finalised first thing on Thursday morning, the government says it will build a new line between Warrington and just east of Manchester. But the journey into Liverpool and across the Pennines will be done on upgraded existing lines.This has fewer capacity benefits because separating fast non-stop services onto a different line from local services that stop at every station allows for far more of both to run. On HS2, the eastern leg will be built from Birmingham to East Midlands Parkway, instead of a continuing onto Leeds. As a result, capacity will not be released on the east coast mainline and midland mainline. Nottingham and Derby city centres will gain direct HS2 services.The government also used the rail plan to recommit to transpennine electrification and the electrification of the midland mainline – projects which it had preciously announced and cancelled. It also says it will investigate proposals for a “rapid transit” system for Leeds. HS2 will go ahead to Manchester, as previously planned, although a link at Golborne to the West Coast Mainline is still under review.Parts of the midlands fared better under the review, with a green light for the Midland Hub rail programme pushed for by local leaders. John Peace, chair of Midlands Connect, said that while the plans were “different in some respects to what we’d expected, there are a lot of positives in here and lots of things to be excited about”.But east midlands chamber of commerce chief executive Scott Knowles said the announced was a “bitter blow to communities in the East Midlands”, accusing the government of “reneging on clear commitments repeatedly made by our country’s leaders”.Labour leader Keir Starmer said the policy showed that the government’s “levelling up” promises were “just a slogan”.”If you can’t level up in Bradford then the whole levelling-up agenda is seen for what it really is,” he said on a visit to the city on Thursday.Accusing Boris Johnson of having “let down everybody in the North”, he told reporters: “The North of England has been betrayed.”Because the Prime Minister made two very important promises: HS2 all the way to Leeds, a new line, that promise has been ripped up. He also promised Northern Powerhouse Rail, a new line from Manchester to Leeds, and that plan has been ripped up.”This was the first test of ‘levelling up’ and the Government has completely failed and let down everybody in the North, and you can’t believe a word the Prime Minister says.”But Boris Johnson said it was “total rubbish” to suggest he was breaking his promises.”Of course, there are going to be people who, you know, always want everything at once. And there are lots of people who’ll say, ‘look, what we should do is carve huge new railways through virgin territory, smashing through unspoilt countryside and villages, and do it all at once’,” he said. “The problem with that is those extra high-speed lines take decades and they don’t deliver the commuter benefits that I’m talking about. We will eventually do them.” More

The UK is “dangerously close” to becoming an “elected dictatorship” under Boris Johnson, veteran Tory Ken Clarke is warning – as he branded his handling of Brexit clashes “laughable”.The former cabinet heavyweight lashed out at the prime minister’s disregard for “constitutional constraints”, calling his party “more nationalist than at any time in my lifetime”.“He gets angry if the courts or parliament try to interfere. As the elected prime minister, he thinks he should not be impeded in these ways,” Lord Clarke said.“We are now getting dangerously close to the “elected dictatorship” that Lord Hailsham, the former Lord Chancellor, warned us about half a century ago.”In an interview with The New European, the Tory veteran warned the failures of Mr Johnson’s Brexit deal were now being exposed, with a forecast slump in GDP and the loss of security cooperation.And, on the row over the Northern Ireland Protocol, he said: “There is a serious danger of the Good Friday Agreement and power-sharing collapsing and heading back to direct rule.”Lord Clarke said: “I considered myself to be in the mainstream of the party and am not pleased that people who think like me – internationalist, outward-looking, progressive – have been marginalised.“The party is now more right wing and nationalist than at any time in my lifetime.”He ridiculed the ‘global Britain’ promise as “a slogan, an excuse for spending money on a royal yacht and flying the flag in odd places”. “We have to get used to our reduced role in the world,” the peer said.Lord Clarke, who left the Commons in 2019, said Mr Johnson was trying to “tear up” his Brexit agreement, but “find a way of doing so in a way that they can blame on the French”.“I only hope that they have got experts working behind the scenes on an alternative plan. A lot of what is being said at the moment is laughable,” he warned.On the threat to the constitution, the former chancellor and home secretary said: “We have relied for too long on a Victorian ideal of what we used to call decent chaps doing the right thing to keep our constitutional principles intact.“We have got to the point where we need a serious written constitution. We need to restore the strengths of the Commons and the Lords by putting their powers into statutory reforms.“We are at the absurd point where it is up to the government whether extremely contentious pieces of legislation get to be debated at all.”Lord Clarke warned many Conservative voters were alive to the shift, adding: “Moderate Tories are upset by right-wing nationalism. This was spectacularly shown in the Chesham and Amersham by-election.” More

A leading architect of the government’s social care reforms said he is “very disappointed” and “uncomfortable” with watered-down proposals for the social care cap that hit less affluent households.Sir Andrew Dilnot told MPs that changes to the Social Care Act, due to be voted on next week, would mean the poorest households in the country will not actually benefit from the cap.He told the House of Commons treasury committee on Thursday that the changes will mean pensioners “will be much less protected against catastrophic risk.”“A very large proportion of the population needing care will find itself materially less protected by the proposals the government has announced then they would’ve been,” he said. Those with less valuable houses but facing significant care journeys will be much less protected against catastrophic risk and the sale of their house if this amendment were made”.Sir Andrew, a former director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said there is likely to be a north-south divide as “people living in northern and other less high house prices are likely to be harder hit.”In 2019 Prime Minsiter, Boris Johnson promised “no one would have to sell their house” to pay for social care. However the new proposals will mean some pensioners will have to use up 80 per cent of their wealth to cover care costs before the threshold kicks in.Sir Andrew said: “That would mean you certainly would have to sell your house.” However, he said that while the current financial settlement for social care was “inadequate,” it would nonetheless “deliver a significant increase in long line spending in social care.”He added: “Now, there is a whole set of areas — particularly yesterday’s announcement — on which I feel very uncomfortable, but it is striking is that it’s the first time it’s happened.” More

Boris Johnson’s government is said to be in talks with Albania on a controversial plan to send migrants who cross the English Channel on small boats to the eastern European country.Justice secretary Dominic Raab declined to deny that ministers are hoping to reach a deal to fly migrants to Albania for their asylum claims to be processed 1,500 miles away.“We are looking at international partnerships that will take the processing out of the UK,” he told Times Radio following a report in The Times that discussions were under way to remove migrants within seven days of their arrival in Britain.Asked on Sky News if migrants could be going to Albania, Mr Raab said: “That’s one country … We are willing to look with partners at whether it’s possible to do this international processing.”But Albania’s foreign minister Olta Xhaçka dismissed the report in The Times claiming that the UK was discussing an offshore migrant centre with Albania as “fake news”.The idea was also immediately condemned by the Refugee Council – accusing ministers of showing “cruelty and heartlessness towards our fellow human beings in search of safety”.The justice secretary said the idea of “offshore” processing of asylum claims would deter migrants from making dangerous journeys. “We must reduce the pull factor. We will look at all legitimate means of doing that, and we will do so with our partners and allies,” Mr Raab said on Thursday.There is a growing frustration in government that efforts to collaborate with France have not significantly reduce the number of migrant boats coming across the English Channel.Earlier this week France rejected a British claim that home secretary Priti Patel and her counterpart Gerald Darmanin agreed to work to prevent “100 per cent of crossings” of the English Channel.The Home Office issued a joint statement from the pair which said they had agreed measures to “stop the dangerous crossings”. But the French embassy in London said the 100 per cent figure “should not be presented” as an agreed figure.“Offshore processing is our best hope now, as nothing else is working,” an unnamed minister told The Times. But a Home Office source told the newspaper the discussions with Albania were in the “early days”.Mr Raab played down the idea of reliance on Albania alone for offshore processing on Thursday, telling LBC: “A lot of these discussions are at a preliminary stage, it is much more than just one partner.”Asked if the plan will include Albania and Rwanda, Mr Raab said: “Let me avoid talking about individual countries but just say with international partners this is something we’re probing because we want to test the idea because we will do everything we can to resolve this problem.”The plan for offshore processing was swiftly condemned by campaigners. Enver Solomon, the chief executive of the Refugee Council, said it would not work as a deterrent, would lead to longer delays in the system as well as being “a waste of money”.Mr Solomon told The Independent: “This is a desperate measure from a government that can only think of how to show cruelty and heartlessness towards our fellow human beings in search of safety.”He added: “Instead this government should focus on addressing channel crossings through an ambitious expansion of existing safe routes, introducing a humanitarian visa system and recognising that many people seeking asylum will have no other option but to take dangerous journeys and they should always be given a fair hearing on UK soil.” More

Jeremy Corbyn is launching legal action against a Conservative councillor whose account posted a tweet mocking him.The former Labour leader is acting in response to a crudely composited image that depicted him laying a poppy wreath on the burning wreck of the taxi caught up in the Liverpool hospital bombing.The image was posted to the Twitter account of Paul Nickerson, a Tory councillor in East Riding in Yorkshire, accompanied by the comment: “Unsurprisingly.”Mr Nickerson, who has been suspended by his council’s Conservative group, deleted the tweet and apologised – but claimed his account had been hacked by friends playing a joke. He told the BBC: “As soon as I was able I deleted the comments.”Mr Nickerson is also thought to have apologised personally to Mr Corbyn, who represents Islington North in the Commons.However, a spokesperson for the Labour MP confirmed to the PA news agency he had contacted his solicitor and was taking legal action.The original tweet is understood to be a reference to photographs of Mr Corbyn attending a wreath-laying ceremony at a Tunisian cemetery.A row erupted in 2018 when the then-Labour leader said he had been present when wreaths were laid at the Tunis site in 2014 to commemorate the victims of an attack in Paris in 1992, but did not think he was “actually involved in it”.Mr Nickerson now faces an investigation by his local Conservative colleagues.Jonathan Owen, the leader of the Tories on East Riding Council, said in a statement: “All people in public life, irrespective of politics, should be united in condemning the terrorist attack that took place outside the Liverpool Women’s Hospital on Remembrance Sunday.“It is not the time for inappropriate remarks, however intended. Residents should expect their elected representatives to act in an appropriate manner at all times.”The Independent has contacted Mr Nickerson and Mr Corbyn for additional comment.Additional reporting by PA Media More