Markus Andrews

Boris Johnson’s sister has suggested that the prime minister was a university friend of socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, who is awaiting trial in the US on charges of grooming underage girls for sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.In an article for The Spectator magazine, Rachel Johnson painted a colourful picture of the pair relaxing together in the junior common room of Balliol College, Oxford, where they were contemporaries in the 1980s.The “shiny glamazon” Maxwell had her high-heeled boot “resting on my brother Boris’s thigh” as she held forth to fellow students, she said.Ms Johnson remained vague about how well her brother knew Maxwell at the time, but her decision to publicly link them will be an embarrassment for the prime minister at a time when Maxwell is facing one of the most high-profile trials of the decade.Ms Johnson said it was “hard not to feel a batsqueak of pity” for Maxwell for her extended detention awaiting trial.“I intersected briefly with her at Oxford,” she wrote.“As a fresher, I wandered into Balliol JCR one day in search of its subsidised breakfast granola-and-Nescafé offering and found a shiny glamazon with naughty eyes holding court astride a table, a high-heeled boot resting on my brother Boris’s thigh.“She gave me a pitying glance but I did manage to snag an invite to her party in Headington Hill Hall — even though I wasn’t in the same college as her and Boris.“I have a memory of her father, Bob, coming out in a towelling robe and telling us all to go home.”Ms Johnson said that “fairweather friends” would not now reveal they attended Maxwell’s party, adding: “You only know who your real chums are when you’re in the gutter.”There was no immediate response from No 10 to Ms Johnson’s remarks. More

Boris Johnson has said it is “worth considering” sending cratefuls of cash to settle a historic £400 million debt to Iran in the hope of helping to free jailed Briton Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe.The UK government has always rejected the link drawn by authorities in Tehran between the money – owed for an order of tanks from Britain which were never delivered – and the continued detention of Ms Zaghari-Ratcliffe and other UK-Iranian dual nationals.But the detained mother-of-one’s husband Richard Ratcliffe, who recently completed a 21-day hunger strike to raise awareness of Nazanin’s plight, has demanded answers from ministers on the cash.And former foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt today demanded to know whether it was being withheld because of fears that making the payment would breach international sanctions or because of pressure from the US.The money was paid to the UK by the former Shah of Iran before he was deposed in the country’s 1979 revolution, but Britain refused to hand over the tanks to the new Islamic Republic.In an appearance before the House of Commons Liaison Committee, Mr Johnson was challenged by Mr Hunt over what obstacles prevent the debt being paid.He asked whether the UK could follow the example of former US president Barack Obama, who authorised a flight to Iran carrying wooden pallets bearing $400m of cash in various currencies on the same day that Tehran released four American prisoners and formally implemented its nuclear deal.“If you can’t use a bank to repay it, for various reasons, why can’t we do what President Obama did in January 2016 and fly a crate of cash to Tehran and just repay that debt?” Mr Hunt asked the prime minister.Mr Johnson replied: “It is certainly worth considering. But as you know there are complexities attached.”The PM said the government was working “as hard as we can” to secure Nazanin’s release.Giving evidence to the committee, Mr Johnson said it “breaks my heart” that he could not give an assurance she would be home in time for Christmas.“I continue to be horrified by the ordeal she has been through. I have nothing but admiration for the way in which she has dealt with it. It has been unbearable to witness and I know how much she wants to come home and to see her family,” he said.“I can tell you we are working as hard as we can to ensure that we deliver that. It is not easy. If I could tell Nazanin now that we’d have her home for Christmas, I certainly would.“It breaks my heart that I can’t make that promise. We will continue to do what we can.” More

Boris Johnson has admitted for the first time that former Tory MP Owen Paterson broke the rules on MPs’ conduct by lobbying on behalf of companies paying him £100,000 a year.Under intensive questioning from a committee of senior MPs, the prime minister admitted it had been a “total mistake” for him to put forward changes to standards rules which might have got the former cabinet minister off the hook.“Do I regret that decision? I certainly do,” he told the Commons Liaison Committee.Mr Johnson’s admission comes 14 days after he whipped Tory MPs to vote to overrule Westminster’s standards system and give Mr Paterson the chance of an appeal against a 30-day suspension recommended by a report from the House of Commons Standards Committee.The prime minister told MPs that his motivation for trying to assist Mr Paterson was sympathy following the suicide of the long-serving MP’s wife Rose.“I think it was a very sad case, but I think there was no question he had fallen foul of the rules on paid advocacy, as far as I could see from the report,” said Mr Johnson.He said that he wanted to see if there was cross-party support for a change in the rules to allow the Shropshire North MP “a fair right of appeal”.But told by Standards Committee chair Chris Bryant that the Shropshire North MP’s appeal was heard “endlessly” by the panel of cross-party MPs and lay members before the publication of its report, he admitted: “In forming the impression that the former member for North Shropshire had not had a fair process I may well have been mistaken.”And when Mr Bryant pointed out that the PM had made no effort to build cross-party support for his plans before ordering Tory MPs to vote them through, he responded sheepishly: “So it would seem.”Labour MP Yvette Cooper challenged Mr Johnson over his comment that Paterson had “fallen foul of the commissioner on standards”.“This is an area where we really need clarity, given your important role, and you used a slightly odd form of words,” said Ms Cooper.“Do you believe Owen Paterson broke the rules? Yes or no?“Do you recognise that, given your responsibility for upholding the ministerial code, for upholding the rules, for upholding standards, it is really important that you should not give any impression, when there is an independent report that finds 14 occasions of paid lobbying, that you think that is OK?”Mr Johnson said he accepted that, adding: “In retrospect, it might have helped a bit if I had said that I believed that Owen had broken the rules as far as I could see.”But Ms Cooper interrupted: “We have an independent process that has looked into this. Every time you say ‘as far as I could see’ and you qualify it, you are undermining the independent system that all of us need to work.“You need to have some integrity and to uphold the standards.” Mr Johnson’s attempt to defend Paterson “creates an impression which is very unfortunate and very damaging to public life”, she said, asking: “Do you accept you have a responsibility… to establish much higher standards?” “I do,” replied the PM.”Yes, I think it was a total mistake not to see that Owen’s breach of the rules made any discussion about anything else impossible. I totally accept that.” More

Boris Johnson has finally apologised for failing to wear a mask on a recent hospital visit – despite No 10 having claimed he followed the rules at all times.The prime minister conceded he was at fault when he walked the corridors in Hexham Hospital, after reports he was warned three times to put on the face covering.But he told MPs the incident should not be added to his “litany of crimes”, saying: “There were barely 30 seconds when I wasn’t wearing a mask.“I walked out of the room mistakenly not wearing it. I put it on as soon as I realised I had made the mistake. I apologise for that.”Speaking to a committee of MPs, the prime minister insisted that “most pictures of my visit to the hospital” would show him wearing a face covering.Mr Johnson was accused of a disregard for the NHS and Covid, after hospital chiefs emailed Downing Street before the visit – eight days ago – insisting masks must be worn in all areas.The prime minister’s team was reportedly reminded of the rules when he arrived, but he took off his mask as he walked along a corridor and met staff.The hospital trust’s website stated: “You must ensure that you wear your covering or mask throughout your visit,” adding that the rules applied to everyone and all parts of the premises.The apology came despite Ms Johnson’s notorious refusal to apologise for other mistakes – including the botched attempt to fix anti-sleaze rules to clear Owen Paterson.It also follows the refusal, until recently, of Tory MPs to wear masks in the crowded Commons chamber – despite rising Covid infection rates at Westminster.The failure to wear a mask kicked off a controversy in the north east. One local Labour MP, Ian Lavery, said: “People were astonished that the prime minister was bowling up the corridor of a hospital without a mask.“This shows a callous disregard for patients, visitors and the fantastic workforce, who have been at the frontline throughout the pandemic.”Susie Flintham of the campaign group Covid-19 Families for Justice said: “The PM was putting lives at risk completely unnecessarily by visiting a hospital and refusing to put his mask on, despite being repeatedly asked to.“For him to make a point of posing for a photo without a mask is a slap in the face to bereaved families.”The prime minister faced similar criticism at the Cop26 climate summit for being pictured next to 95-year-old David Attenborough while not wearing a mask. More

Boris Johnson’s government has pledged to release whatever details it has of meetings involving ministers, officials and health firm Randox following a vote in the Commons amid sleaze claims.MPs voted in favour of a Labour motion to release details of meetings about the £600m-worth of Covid testing contracts given to the diagnostics company after the government abstained from the vote.It following the stunning admission from the government that minutes of a key telephone call about a Covid contract awarded to Randox after it employed former Tory MP Owen Paterson are missing.MPs were told details of the conference call could not be “located” – just one hour after Boris Johnson bowed to pressure to release details of the contracts.Labour attacked the “astonishing revelation”, with the party’s deputy leader Angela Rayner suggesting the lack of minutes was in breach of the ministerial code. “This is corruption,” she said.The meeting at the heart of Labour’s request for information took place on 9 April 2020, and involves Randox, ex-health minister Lord Bethell and Mr Paterson – who recently quit over the government’s botched attempt to save him from suspension.Speaking at PMQs, Boris Johnson had said he was “very happy to publish all the details of the Randox contracts, which have been investigated by the National Audit Office already”.But health minister Gillian Keegan later told MPs the government has been “unable to locate a formal note” of what was said during a call between the ex-health minister, Mr Paterson and Randox.Ms Keegan echoed Mr Johnson’s desire to publish what is deemed “in scope” of Labour’s request – but she prompted a furious reaction by disclosing the lack of a formal note on the conference call.Labour MP Dame Angela Eagle said the minister had made an “astonishing” admission about the existence of “meetings with no minutes that are official … and she is unable to locate a copy of what is clearly a meeting that happened”.Another Labour MP shouted: “Staggering.”Ms Keegan sought to clarify that the government had not “lost” the minutes of a meeting between Randox and a health minister – only that it cannot find them at the moment.“I just want to make it clear what I said: we have been unable to locate a formal note of the meeting. That is what I have been told so far. That doesn’t mean there isn’t one. It has been unable to locate one.”Lib Dem Alistair Carmichael hit back at told Ms Keegan: “I wonder if the search by these ministers extends to the shredding room.”Ms Keegan added: “We will review what information we hold in scope and we will define the scope … and we’ll come back to parliament and we’ll deposit them here in the libraries of the House. We will commit to do that.”Warning that missing minutes would have to be found, Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said: “I would expect that the government meetings that take place with people around would always be minuted. If not, I think it opens up another question – and I don’t want that question to be opened up.”Dave Penman, general secretary of the FDA trade union for civil servants, told Sky News that the admission “raises serious questions about whether officials were present and whether a note was actually taken – those are matters of fact which should be clarified urgently”.Randox said it would “co-operate fully” after Labour’s motion to force the government to release minutes of meetings between ministers and the firm – and all communications over contracts – was approved unopposed.A company spokesman said: “Public disclosure will demonstrate the efficiency and value for money provided by Randox through contacts awarded in full compliance with government regulations at a time of national crisis.”Randox said lobbying played no role in the awarding of contracts. “The company has 40 years’ experience in testing and diagnostics. It is proud of its performance and delivery under the contracts awarded to it on merit by the government,” said a spokesman. More

Britain’s top Brexit official lowered the temperature in the U.K.’s trade feud with the European Union on Wednesday, saying he believes it is possible to reach agreement with the bloc.Chief U.K. negotiator David Frost said there were still “gaps” between the two sides, but added: “I’m glad there’s ambition on the EU side…I think it can be done.” “Whether it will be done is a different question,” Frost added during a visit to Belfast to update political leaders on U.K.-EU talks aimed at resolving differences over Northern Ireland trade.Negotiations have dragged on for a month, with Britain threatening to suspend parts of the legally binding divorce agreement between the two sides if no solution is found soon. Frost said triggering an emergency break clause known as Article 16 “is a very real option for us” if there is no deal. But he added that “it’s certainly our preference to try to resolve it without using Article 16.”Article 16 lets either side suspend portions of the Brexit agreement in extreme circumstances. A move by Britain to use it would trigger EU retaliation and could spiral into a trade war between the 27-nation bloc and its increasingly estranged former member.Northern Ireland is part of the U.K. and shares a border with EU member Ireland. Under the Brexit deal agreed before the U.K. left the bloc’s economic structures at the end of 2020, it remains inside the EU’s tariff-free single market for goods, to ensure there is an open border on the island of Ireland — a key pillar of Northern Ireland’s peace process. That has created a new customs border in the Irish Sea for goods entering Northern Ireland from the rest of the U.K., even though they are part of the same country.It has also brought red tape for businesses, and has angered Northern Ireland’s British Unionists, who say the checks undermine Northern Ireland’s place in the U.K. and destabilize the delicate political balance on which peace rests. The Democratic Unionist Party which leads Northern Ireland’s power-sharing government, is demanding the agreement be scrapped, though many businesses simply want the new trade arrangements to work more smoothly.The EU has agreed to make changes to the deal, offering to reduce checks on food, plants and animals entering Northern Ireland by as much as 80% and to cut paperwork for transport companies in half.Britain is demanding the EU go farther and remove its top court from its role in resolving any disputes over the agreement — an idea the bloc flatly rejects.Frost and his EU counterpart, Maros Sefcovic, are due to meet Friday to assess the state of the talks.___Follow all AP stories on post-Brexit developments at https://apnews.com/hub/Brexit. More

Trade between Northern Ireland and the Republic has rocketed while exports from mainland Britain to the South have flatlined since Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal, new statistics show today.The figures appear to vindicate warnings from anti-Brexit campaigners about the damaging impact on commerce between Northern Ireland and Great Britain of the prime minister’s decision to erect a cumbersome customs border in the Irish Sea.But they also bolster Brexit minister David Frost’s claim that the Northern Ireland Protocol has led to a “diversion of trade” of the kind which would allow the UK to invoke Article 16 to suspend the operation of the agreement.Figures released by Dublin’s Central Statistics Office show that trade from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland increased by a massive 60 per cent and from South to North by 48 per cent in the first nine months after the Brexit deal came into effect on 1 January 2021, compared to the same period last year.According to the CSO, Northern Irish exports to the Republic in the first three quarters of 2021 increased by €1,061m (£897m) to €2,822m (£2,385m), compared to the previous year.Trade in the other direction rose by €835m (£706m) to €2,577m (£2,178m).Some of the increase in business will undoubtedly be due to relaxation of Covid-19 restrictions over the period.But exports from Ireland to mainland Britain increased by a significantly smaller 36 per cent and British exports to the Republic by just 2 per cent over the same period, adding weight to arguments that the dramatic rise in North-South trade is at least partially due to the impact of the Protocol.The imbalance in growth in British-Irish trade reflects the fact that the UK has not yet imposed new Brexit checks on imports from the EU, while they have been enforced in the other direction since January.Lord Frost told BBC Radio Ulster on Wednesday that trade links between the region and Great Britain were being “worn away” by the protocol which he negotiated and Mr Johnson agreed.“I think in aggregate, the trade links with Great Britain and Northern Ireland are about three times as big as those with Ireland and the single market,” said the Brexit minister.“So in aggregate those links in Great Britain are incredibly important. So it’s those [links] that are being sort of worn away by the way the protocol is working, and that’s why it’s so important to deal with them.” More

Pies made in Britain will be banned from export to the EU if their ingredients do not come from an “approved” farm or factory, trade experts have warned MPs.A new Brussels food safety regulation – to come into force in March next year – is alarming companies that fear Brexit will impose further barriers to sales, an inquiry heard.The change will mean any ingredient of animal origin – including meat, milk and eggs – “must come from EU-approved establishments”, MPs were told.Emily Rees, of the analysts Trade Strategies, agreed with a Conservative former trade minister who raised the threat to the exports of “chicken, ham and mushroom pies”, or fish pies, that fell foul of the rule.“That fish pie can be consumed within Great Britain but will not be able to be sent into Northern Ireland, or exported into the EU, because you will not have the origin certificate necessary,” she said.Ms Rees said the problem could easily arise because the UK had recently approved agricultural ingredients from premises in Turkey – which might not be on the EU approved list.Mark Garnier, a Tory trade minister, raised the alarm over the “chicken, ham and mushroom pie problem”, warning: “It could be how you make the pastry, or the ham.”The end of a transition period for tightening rules on “composite products” was “concerning many companies right now that export to the EU”.The inquiry, by the Commons International Trade Committee, heard suggestions that UK exporters might resort to two different production lines – to satisfy EU rules and laxer requirements for other markets.The practice is followed by Australian farmers, to separate beef for EU export – which must be hormone-free – from sales to other countries without a ban.Shanker Singham, of the trade consultancy Competere and a former government adviser, said a weakness in the Brexit trade deal was an absence of “mutual recognition”.He agreed that meant manufacturers not only had to use EU-approved parts but also go through the burden of proving they passed the test.Mr Singham warned the committee that there was little chance of progress until the UK and EU had settled their long-running dispute over the Northern Ireland protocol.Exporters have already protested at huge new costs and barriers since the trade deal came into force last January, swiping £17bn from EU trade in just three months.The economic damage from leaving the EU became clearer when the Office for Budget Responsibility said GDP would fall by 4 per cent, taking £80bn out of the UK economy each year.Ministers were also forced to concede that Brexit was a key cause behind the autumn food and fuel shortages – which have put Christmas deliveries at risk. More