Markus Andrews

A coalition of 100 groups has urged Boris Johnson to abandon the looming cut to universal credit – claiming it will “fundamentally undermine” his stated mission to address inequality.Ending the £20-a-week uplift introduced to help claimants weather the storm of the Covid crisis will cause “immense, immediate and avoidable hardship”, the charities, unions and think-tanks said.The government plans to start phasing out the £1,040-a-year increase in universal credit and working tax credit from the end of September, based on claimants’ payment dates.Work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey resisted calls this week to keep the uplift, insisting the time is right to focus on encouraging people back into work.However, the coalition said most people who will be affected by the cut are already in work and warn it will damage the government’s mission to “level up” the country.In an open letter to Mr Johnson, the campaigners wrote: “We are rapidly approaching a national crossroads which will reveal the true depth of the government’s commitment to improving the lives of families on the lowest incomes.”They added: “Imposing what is effectively the biggest overnight cut to the basic rate of social security since World War II will pile unnecessary financial pressure on around 5.5 million families, both in and out of work.“This cut risks causing immense, immediate, and avoidable hardship. A strong social security system is a crucial first step to building back better. We strongly urge you to make the right decision.”The coalition – which includes Save the Children, Citizens Advice and the National Education Union – said 413 parliamentary constituencies across Britain will see at least a third of working-age families with children affected.Save the Children said 3.5 million children live in households that will be hit by the cut, while Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) research shows the move could push 500,000 people into poverty, including 200,000 children.The move is now opposed by many of the country’s leading civil society groups, six former work and pensions secretaries and MPs across the political spectrum, including a growing number of Conservative backbenchers.Disquiet in Tory ranks has been growing over the summer. Last week two “red wall” Tory MPs from the north of England – Peter Aldous and John Stevenson – wrote to the PM urging him to ditch plans to cut the uplift.Mr Johnson could face a Commons vote on a planned cut to universal credit two days after MPs return from summer recess. A source told The Independent that Labour was “likely” to force a vote on the issue, but this hasn’t been officially confirmed yet.But if the prime minister presses ahead with the cut, it will formally come into effect on 6 October – the same day as his Tory Party conference speech.The open letter from charities follows calls from leading politicians in each of the four UK nations this week. Cross-party committees from Westminster, Stormont, Holyrood and the Senedd wrote to Ms Coffey calling on the government to make the extra payment permanent.The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has not published its impact assessment for the imminent move. A government spokesperson said: “The temporary uplift to universal credit was designed to help claimants through the economic shock and financial disruption of the toughest stages of the pandemic, and it has done so.” More

Government plans for voter ID risk breaching human rights law by discriminating against as many as 2 million elderly, disabled and ethnic minority people, a report has warned.The report, published by parliament’s cross-party Joint Committee on Human Rights, warned that the demand to show photo ID at the polling station could deny the right to vote to large numbers of people and create barriers to minority groups participating in elections.And the report found that the problem which the measure is supposed to solve, of people fraudulently passing themselves off as someone else to vote, was “rare”, with just 171 allegations since 2014, leading to nine cautions and three convictions.Instead, the committee said, the government could massively increase involvement in democracy by introducing automatic voter registration, following Electoral Commission research that up to 9.4m people eligible to vote are not on the electoral roll or are registered at the wrong address. This included around 25 per cent of black and Asian voters and 45 per cent of 18-24 year-olds, compared to an average of 17 per cent overall and 10 per cent of over-70s.Ministers can expect stiff opposition to the Elections Bill when it comes back to the House of Commons for its second reading on Tuesday next week, with many MPs concerned that it will exclude marginalised groups from voting.Today’s report warned that the government must do more to demonstrate the need to voter ID and mitigate the potential barriers to voting it will create, in order to avoid breaches of the Human Rights Convention duties to hold free and fair elections.The committee heard evidence that many of the 2.1m people who do not currently have photo ID in the form or passports, driving licences and other official documentation would be reluctant to sign up for the Voter Card proposed by the government as an alternative way of proving their identity at the polling station.Cabinet Office research found that 42 per cent of those with no photo ID said they were unlikely to apply.And Operation Black Vote director Simon Woolley told the committee that introducing a requirement for voter ID would fuel distrust among ethnic minority communities and could have “a monstrous negative effect, which some have characterised as voter suppression”.Lord Woolley said he feared that the Voter Card would act as “another impediment for a group that is already hesitant about fully engaging in the democratic process”, warning: “Quite a few people in black, Asian and minority ethnic communities feel that a Government who do not have their best interests at heart may want to find a route for these ID cards as Big Brother to watch over them.”The committee said that the government’s aim to improve the integrity of elections was “clearly legitimate”, but warned: “Any measures must be proportionate to the scale of the problem and not interfere with the right to vote so as to render the right to vote ineffective.”Voter ID was being proposed at a time when public confidence in elections is at an “all-time high”, with Electoral Commission research finding that 87 per cent believe voting is safe from fraud and abuse – up from 80 per cent in 2020.And the deputy director of the Electoral Reform Society, Jessica Garland, told the committee that it was “implausible” to suggest that fraud by personation – trying to vote under a false identity – was happening undetected.“To change an election result by personation would require a huge operation, identifying which constituencies would be marginal enough to make a difference,” said Dr Garland. “That is difficult for political scientists, let alone anyone else.“On top of that, a lot of people would have to be involved. You would have to know who was not going to vote in order for that not to be detected, and presumably the candidate would have to be aware. We are talking about a large-scale operation. It is implausible that it could be going on undetected.”Evidence from the US showed that marginalised communities “struggle” to get appropriate ID when called upon to do so for voting purposes, she added.Human Rights Committee chair Harriet Harman said: “The government has a duty to ensure everyone can vote, no-one is prevented from voting by discrimination and also that elections are free from fraud.“However current proposals which would prohibit voting without voter ID may deny the right to vote from large numbers of electors, and could have a discriminatory impact. The government must explain how these measures are both necessary and proportionate given the low numbers of recorded instances of fraud at polling stations.“The government must prove that the need for people to get a Voter ID card does not act as a deterrent to voting. In particular they must demonstrate an understanding, so far lacking, of the impact of these measures on marginalised groups and show how they plan to ensure access to the ballot box for all.“A Cabinet Office spokesperson said: “Stealing someone’s vote is stealing their voice. Fraud in our elections is something we cannot allow room for, so we are stamping out potential for it to take place by requiring photographic identification. “Voters in Northern Ireland have been using photo identification since 2003. It has been operating with ease for decades and has proven to be effective at tackling fraud and improving voter confidence.“Our research, which draws on the most comprehensive data to date, shows that 99 per cent of ethnic minorities already have a form of identification, as do 98 per cent of those aged 70 or above. Local authorities will be legally required to provide a free voter card for the small proportion of people who may not already have photo identification.” More

School spending per pupil in England will remain lower than in 2010 following a decade of education budget cuts, new research has revealed.Boris Johnson’s government has committed extra £7.1bn funding for schools in England for 2022-2023 – but it will not reverse a cut in real-term spending per pupil over the past decade, according to the Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS).Total school spending per pupil in England was just over £6,500 in the latest complete year of data in 2019-20, some 9 per cent lower in real terms than its high-point of £7,200 in 2009-10, meaning spending will still be 1 per cent lower than a decade ago after accounting for inflation.The think tank also said disadvantaged pupils in the poorest parts of England have suffered from the biggest cuts over the decade of austerity, and its research shows they are now receiving the smallest increase in extra spending.Between 2017–18 and 2022–23, funding allocated for the most privileged schools will increase by 8 to 9 per cent in real terms, compared with only 5 per cent for the most deprived schools.Labour said Conservative cuts have “hammered” school budgets over the last decade and accused the government of “stripping away” children’s opportunities.The opposition urged ministers to invest more in post-Covid catch-up funding, as House of Commons library data showed the UK has outstripped most European countries in the length of time schools were closed for during the pandemic.Luke Sibieta, research fellow at IFS, said the “big squeeze” in school spending per pupil in England was the largest in at least 40 years.“This will make it that much harder for schools to address the major challenge of helping pupils catch up on lost learning alongside everything else they are required to do,” he said.The IFS expert added: “Schools serving disadvantaged communities face the biggest challenges. They faced the biggest cuts up to 2019 and are now receiving the smallest rises. This pattern runs counter to the government’s aim of levelling up poorer parts of the country.”Josh Hillman, director of education at the Nuffield Foundation, the charitable trust which commissioned the research, added: “It is crucial that schools in deprived areas receive appropriate and well-directed funding so that they can help to close the disadvantage gap and ensure all children can reach their potential.”Kate Green, the shadow education secretary, said the IFS report showed how “Conservative cuts have hammered school budgets over the last decade”.The Labour frontbencher added: “Children’s opportunities have been stripped away as class sizes have soared to record levels and enriching extracurricular activities have been cut back.”Since the start of last year children in the UK have been out of class on nearly half (44 per cent) of days – amounting to longer school closures than any European country except Italy.The shadow education secretary said the long stretches pupils spent out of school was partly the fault of failures by education secretary Gavin Williamson.“The Conservatives’ failure to respond to the Covid crisis has kept kids out of class for far longer than their European counterparts,” said Ms Green – calling on the government to make sure proper ventilation is in place so Covid outbreaks can be minimised this autumn.“As the new school year starts, Gavin Williamson is again burying his head in the sand, ignoring the advice of scientific experts and risking creating a climate of chaos for schools if Covid rates rise,” she added.A Department for Education (DfE) spokesperson said the £7.1bn increase in funding for schools, compared to 2019-20 funding levels was “the biggest uplift to school funding in a decade”.The DfE added: “Next year, funding is increasing by 3.2 per cent overall, and by 2.8 per cent per pupil, compared to 2021-22. The National Funding Formula continues to distribute this fairly, based on the needs of schools and their pupil cohorts.” More

Matt Hancock and his girlfriend Gina Coladangelo have been spotted in the Swiss Alps on their first holiday as a couple.The Tory MP had stepped down as health secretary after the couple’s affair during the pandemic was exposed to the press.CCTV footage leaked to a newspaper showed them kissing in Mr Hancock’s departmental office in May, a time when the UK was in stage two of Covid restrictions and face-to-face contact with people indoors was restricted.The pair, who were married at the time of their relationship being made public, and have since left their marital homes, have been seen this week at a £87-a-night mountain hideaway in the resort of Villars-sur-Ollon.They arrived at the resort near Geneva on Tuesday, after driving there from the UK in a bid to remain low-key, according to reports.Photos from The Express newspaper show him wearing a baseball cap while socialising with Ms Coladangelo with a group of other people.Mr Hancock, 42, had tried to keep a low profile since resigning after his affair with mother-of-three Ms Coladangelo, 44, who he first met when they were students at Oxford University. More

The Runnymede Trust has emerged victorious following a battle with a group of Tory MPs who demanded an official probe into its “woke” race equality work citing political bias. The organisation was accused in April of breaking its charitable objectives by criticism of the controversial Sewell Report, with MPs accusing it of being motivated by anger at the government.However, the Charity Commission has ruled that the trust was not in breach of guidelines — nor did trustees breach their legal duties and responsibilities when they decided to work with the Good Law Project in tackling government croynism.Helen Earner, director of regulatory services at the Charity Commission, said: “We take all concerns raised with us about charities seriously – whether they come from members of the public, parliamentarians, or the media.“In this case, we have found no breach of our guidance. However, we have told the trustees of the Runnymede Trust that they must ensure the charity’s engagement with political parties and politicians is balanced.”Clive Jones, chair of the trust, welcomed the ruling and said it worked with all political parties.“As the nation’s heartfelt outpouring after the recent European football final confirmed, the English people – and indeed the people of all four nations of the United Kingdom – understand that racism still exists and must be tackled in all its forms,” he said.“This feedback from the Charity Commission confirms our belief that the Runnymede Trust has an important and worthy role to play in supporting our country in our shared commitment to achieve racial equity, and to make the UK a truly inclusive and post-racial society.“The Runnymede Trust has met with every prime minister since Ted Heath in 1970. We look forward to continuing our relationship with parties across the political spectrum and with stakeholders across our communities – and to meeting with Boris Johnson when the opportunity presents itself. “We would take this opportunity to reiterate our belief that the UK is the greatest nation in the world, not least in terms of equality and opportunity. But we cannot afford to leave anyone behind in terms of outcomes.”John Hayes, MP for South Holland and The Deepings, took aim at trust during an April parliamentary session, confirming that he and other MPs, including Tom Hunt and Darren George Henry, were among those to complain to the commission.He called upon equalities minister Kemi Badenoch to make representations to “stop the worthless work of organisations, often publicly funded, promulgating weird, woke ideas and in doing so seeding doubt and fear, and more than that, disharmony and disunity.” More

Foreign secretary Dominic Raab has promised a “rigorous process” to establish how UK intelligence failed to foresee the swift Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.Mr Raab came under pressure from MPs at an emergency hearing of the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee over the UK’s delay in evacuating the bulk of its nationals and Afghan employees from Afghanistan ahead of the 31 August deadline for withdrawal of US troops.And he was attacked over his decision to go on holiday in the days before Taliban troops took control of capital Kabul, threatening the lives of thousands of people who had worked for the UK military over the past 20 years.The foreign secretary told MPs he was due to travel to the region later on Wednesday to look at arrangements in place in neighbouring countries to help those left behind to leave Afghanistan and reach sanctuary in Britain.But he admitted he was “not confident with any precision at all” on how many people eligible to come to the UK remain in Afghanistan. British nationals still in the country were “probably in the mid to low hundreds”, he said.The foreign secretary admitted that “with the benefit of hindsight” he would have come back from holiday earlier as the crisis unfolded, but told the commitee that he had at no point considered offering his resignation.Labour MP Claudia Webbe accused Mr Raab of being “missing in action” during the crisis and asked him: “Are you the person to take us forward and will you now again consider your position.”But Mr Raab accused her of playing politics. And he told MPs: “I considered getting on with the job of what has been the Herculean task of getting 17,000 people out.”Committee chair Tom Tugendhat, who served as a soldier in Afghanistan, said that the debacle in the country would be “the single biggest challenge that I suspect the UK deals with in terms of redefining our foreign policy”.He described it as “the single biggest foreign policy disaster that the UK has faced since Suez, in the sense that it has exposed a weakness in our alliances and in our stance”.Mr Raab told the committee that the “most likely central proposition” presented by UK intelligence ahead of the crisis was that Kabul was unlikely to fall until next year. While it was clear that the militant Islamist group had the intent to restore its rule over Afghanistan, it was not thought to have the capacity to do so swiftly, said Mr Raab.Dominic Raab attacked by Chris Bryant over his holiday during Afghan crisis.mp4He said the UK had been “clearly… caught unawares” by the scale and pace of the Taliban seizure of control. And he admitted: “Clearly, the assessment that they wouldn’t be able to advance at that speed was not correct, and we’ll need to look and assess why that is the case.“We will have a very rigorous process to look at how those systems got it wrong.”Mr Raab was asked why the UK did not follow France in ensuring those eligible for evacuation were removed well before the date of US withdrawal, which was known long in advance.He told MPs that 1,500 had been removed between April and August, but that the majority of people only came forward for evacuation “relatively late on” when there was a “surge for the door” as it became clear that the Taliban would soon seize control.Mr Tugendhat said that a risk report produced by the Foreign Office as early as 22 July warned of “rapid Taliban advances” which could lead to the fall of cities and the collapse of Afghan government security forces.Mr Raab said that contingency plans had been made for this outcome, but insisted that the central assessment, shared by allied states including the US, was of a much more gradual takeover.Conservative MP Bob Seely asked if the Government was caught “slightly on the hop” due to an “intelligence failure”, with Mr Raab replying: “We always try and … game out for these things.“We’ve got a very professional way of approaching these things but when they’re wrong … you need to look at how you correct that.”Labour committee member Chris Bryant demanded to know why not only the foreign secretary, but also prime minister Boris Johnson, chose to go on holiday in the weeks before the US pullout.“Of course it’s perfectly legitimate for ministers to go on holiday, everybody has that right,” said Mr Bryant. “The difficulty for us is that the prime minister was on holiday and the deputy prime minister – yourself – was on holiday, and as I understand it the permanent under-secretary was on holiday.“All three at the same time, when British nationals were at risk. Many people – thousands of people by our own estimation who stood by us in a difficult time in Afghanistan – were in peril of their lives. And there was still not a proper crisis centre in place. “Do you not see that it’s important for British people to understand why you thought it was right to go on holiday?”Mr Raab accepted that “with the benefit of hindsight, I wouldn’t have gone away”.The foreign secretary said the central assessment of a slow Taliban takeover remained in place “until late”, adding: “The planning for military withdrawal began in April but the contingency plan was also there for a more rapid deterioration.”Work to develop evacuation, medical and security capacity was ongoing before August, he said.“We started planning in June for the contingency of an evacuation and therefore a full drawdown of the embassy,” he told the committee.And he insisted he had been closely involved, telling MPs: “From the period mid-March to 30 August, I had over 40 meetings or telephone calls where Afghanistan was on the agenda.“So that’s broadly one every four days.”Mr Raab said that the UK military and civilian staff had “pulled off a quite remarkable evacuation of people, greater in challenge and scale than anything in living memory”.And he turned on critics who accused him of falling short: “I think there’s been a little bit of breezing over some of the operational challenges, given the rapid fall – beyond expectations – of Kabul and what that really meant on the ground.“What it meant for Afghans, whether they were willing to get to the airport, whether we can get our nationals to the airport, not just because of the logistical obstacles but because of fear and anxiety. We were dealing with all of that.”Mr Raab said he has ordered a “full review” of the closure of the UK’s embassy in Kabul, amid concerns over the details of UK-linked Afghans – as well as portraits of the Queen – falling into the hands of the Taliban.Pressed by Labour MP Neil Coyle, Mr Raab said it was “regrettable” but reflected the “pressure on the ground”.He said: “We had a five-day schedule approach for closure of the embassy and it got brought forward because of the situation on the ground.“I have nonetheless asked for a full review of what happened to make sure we can learn lessons.”All Afghan staff whose names were found by The Times on documents in the ransacked embassy were now in the UK, he said. Mr Raab appeared surprised to hear that a portrait of the Queen had been seized by the Taliban, asking MPs: “My understanding was that it was destroyed. Are you saying that it wasn’t?”Told that militants had been pictured posing with the portrait, he replied: “We had a very clear – in fact I talked through with the team – policy for destroying not just documents but anything relating to HMG. It’s not clear to me whether that came from outside or inside the embassy.“Clearly we were conscious of the attempted propaganda coup around the Taliban taking over embassies.” More

Former chancellor Philip Hammond has been rebuked by a sleaze watchdog for “unwise” lobbying of Treasury officials on behalf of a bank offering Covid software.The Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (Acoba) said that Lord Hammond’s decision to email the second most senior civil servant at his former department was “not acceptable” and broke rules on lobbying by former ministers.Acoba polices the business activities of former ministers to ensure they do not exploit inside information and contacts after they have left office, but has no power to issue sanctions or fines for breaches.The watchdog launched an inquiry into Lord Hammond’s email to the Treasury’s second permanent secretary, Charles Roxburgh, in July last year in relation to OakNorth bank, on whose advisory board he sits.The Tory peer told Mr Roxburgh that the firm was “very keen to ensure that the right people” at the Treasury saw a presentation about “Covid stress-testing” software it had developed for assessing corporate borrowers.In a letter to Acoba chair Lord Pickles, Hammond said he did not believe that the message broke lobbying rules because OakNorth was offering the government access to the software free of charge as its contribution to the national coronavirus effort.However, it its finding today, Acoba told Lord Hammond it was “an unwise step to contact senior officials at the Treasury on OakNorth’s behalf”.It added: “In this case, as the former Chancellor paid by OakNorth, your contact with HM Treasury raises a reasonable concern that direct engagement with the second permanent secretary was only made available to OakNorth as a direct result of your time as Chancellor.“The committee considers the use of your contacts in government in this way was not consistent with the intention of the rules and was not acceptable.“The material consideration is the privileged access you obtained for OakNorth, not the commercial value of the proposition.”Lord Hammond obtained clearance from Acoba to take up his position at OakNorth in January 2020, six months after leaving goverment when Boris Johnson took over from Theresa May as prime minister.A spokesperson for the former chancellor said:“Lord Hammond emailed the Treasury last year to confirm that the relevant people had received a free-of-charge offer of support with Covid response from OakNorth Bank. “He was not seeking to influence policy, obtain funding or win business from the government. “The simple question for Acoba is: did his email breach any of the restrictions that Acoba had placed upon him when approving his role with OakNorth? The answer is clearly that it did not – but Acoba‘s substantive letter dated 31 August seems unwilling to say so explicitly, instead offering opinions while avoiding a straight answer to the question of fact.”The ruling comes soon after David Cameron, in whose cabinet Lord Hammond served, came under fire for lobbying the Treasury on behalf of the failed Greensill Capital. More

Foreign secretary Dominic Raab will be grilled by MPs over his handling of the situation in Afghanistan, after Labour called it “the biggest failure of foreign policy in a generation”.The Tory frontbencher will appear before the crossbench foreign affairs select committee for an hour from 2pm on Wednesday.The government has been strongly criticised for not anticipating the Taliban’s swift takeover after US and Nato troops started to withdraw from Afghanistan earlier this summer. As recently as July, Boris Johnson told MPs that the hardline Islamist group had “no military path to victory”.One critic of the government’s response is General Lord Richard Dannatt, a former head of the British army, who toldTimes Radio on Sunday that ministers were “asleep on watch” and “should have done better”.“It absolutely behoves us to find out why the government didn’t spark up faster,” he added.Mr Raab has come under particular scrutiny for being on holiday in Crete while Kabul fell and for not starting evacuations of vulnerable Afghans sooner. He has rejected calls for his resignation and the prime minister has spoken out in support of him.However, big questions remain about the speed of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s (FCDO) response to developments in Afghanistan. Thousands of Afghans who are eligible for resettlement in the UK remain trapped in the Taliban-controlled country after evacuations from Kabul airport ended on Monday.The government is now in talks with the Taliban about allowing people to leave Afghanistan and is sending 15 crisis response specialists to neighbouring countries to facilitate cross-border evacuations.At the committee session, the foreign secretary will likely be questioned on the support being given to those left behind in Afghanistan, as well as specifics about the UK’s arrangements with nations in the region.Mr Raab will undoubtedly be asked about his personal judgement – specifically why he did not return to the UK from holiday as the Taliban approached Kabul. And whether it is true that he considered Afghanistan “yesterday’s war” and was more interested in Brexit, as one unnamed Pakistani official has put it.MPs will also want to know more about how government intelligence failed to predict the Taliban’s quick rise to power, and how countries such as Russia and China will try to benefit from the absence of western troops in Afghanistan.In a challenging media round on Tuesday, the foreign secretary gave a taste of how he will respond to MPs on Wednesday, dismissing critics as “backbiting finger-pointing peripheral people involved in buck-passing”.Shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy said Mr Raab “has serious questions to answer” on “much more than the chaos of the last two weeks”.“The foreign secretary had 18 months to prepare but was missing in action. As a result, on his watch Britain has become weaker in the world and faces greater risks from terrorism.”Tory backbenchers, including Tom Tugendhat, a former soldier who now chairs the foreign affairs select committee, have also criticised the government.On Saturday he said that the UK’s evacuation efforts were a “sprint finish after a not exactly sprint start”. He also tweeted on Tuesday: “Ending wars is good. Leaving people defenceless in front of armed gangs is not how you end a war, it’s how you start a new one.” More