Markus Andrews

Sir Keir Starmer is facing the threat of a strike within his own party after Labour staff overwhelmingly voted for industrial action in response to compulsory redundancies.The vote came in response to a reorganisation announced by Labour’s general secretary David Evans last month, which will slash 90 jobs from the party organisation in response to a cash crisis.Applications for a voluntary severance scheme closed on Tuesday and there are fears of compulsory redundancies if insufficient volunteers have come forward.In an indicative ballot of party staff who are members of the Unite or GMB unions, some 75 per cent voted in favour of industrial action if faced with compulsory redundancies. Turnout was 80 per cent of the unions’ membership in the party.Unite regional officer Matt Smith said: “Labour will be meeting with Unite and the GMB this Friday and both unions are hopeful that a way forward can be found that avoids any compulsory redundancies or resultant industrial action.”The row comes ahead of a crucial annual conference for Starmer later this month in Brighton.In his first major in-person address to the party since being elected last year, Sir Keir will try to shake off accusations that he lacks direction by setting out more details of his vision for the country.But he is likely to clash with supporters of predecessor Jeremy Corbyn who blame him for the precipitous decline in membership numbers which has left the party strapped for cash.And the new general secretary faces a potentially bruising bid to put his appointment to a ballot, with left-wing group Momentum urging supporters to back a motion to make his post a directly elected position.Mr Evans previously served as assistant general secretary under Tony Blair, sparking accusations from Corbyn supporters that his appointment is part of a plan to drag Labour into the centre ground.Under the banner Organise to Win, he has told staff that the party is adopting a new, slimmed-down structure, designed to produce “winning, voter-centric policies” rather than lecturing voters on what they should think.Labour’s finances have also been hit by a number of pay-outs over anti-Semitism allegations dating back to the Corbyn era, while largest funder Unite is conducting a review of its donations to the party. More

Ethnic minority surgeons are being blocked from job promotions due to an elite “old-boys’ network” within the profession, according to researchers.Analysis of more than 3,000 junior surgeons in NHS England over the past decade revealed that Black women junior surgeons were 42 percentage points less likely to be promoted than white men, while women of Indian and Pakistani ethnicity were 28 percentage points less likely to be promoted.The research, presented at the British Academy of Management online annual conference, led medical professionals to urge government ministers to ramp up its efforts to tackle racism in the sector.It also highlighted a gender divide, with white women 21 percentage points less likely than white male counterparts to be promoted. Women of Chinese and south-east Asian ethnicity were 14 percentage points behind.Black men were 27 percentage points behind white men, with Indian and Pakistani men 10 percentage points behind, and men of Chinese and south-east Asian ethnicity six percentage points behind.Ethnic minority women accounted for 15 per cent of surgeons in 2020, but just 8 per cent of trainees who were promoted to consultant were from this group, the research found.One of the researchers, Professor Carol Woodhams of the University of Surrey, said: “This is objective evidence that disadvantage against diverse groups in surgery is deep-rooted and a new progressive milieu in the NHS and the broader society has not yet translated into concrete and progressive outcomes.“Women and ethnic minority junior surgeons may have less access to important informal networks that bestow the sponsorship and patronage that is so important in securing a consultant post.”She said even with the same number of training hours and the same record of career interruptions, women and black men were less likely to be promoted to consultant. More

Refugees fleeing Taliban rule in Afghanistan will not be resettled in the UK if they come across the English Channel in small boats, a Home Office minister has said.Afghan resettlement minister Victoria Atkins said refugees would have to come via “legal” routes pre-agreed with officials if they want to access support in Britain.“Our message has been, please, please do not travel here illegally,” Ms Atkins said as she set out resettlement plans – dubbed Operation Warm Welcome by the government.At least 8,000 Afghan staff and family members evacuated under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) scheme will be given indefinite leave to remain in the UK, the Home Office has confirmed.But Ms Atkins said the government had not decided whether the 5,000 Afghans who will be helped to come to the UK under the separate resettlement scheme over the next year will get indefinite leave to remain. “These decisions will be made in due course,” she told Sky News.Thousands of Afghans with ties to the UK mission in Afghanistan reportedly remain trapped in the country, having been unable to get on evacuation flights before the final withdrawal of western troops from the country.But the Home Office minister insisted that desperate Afghans who flee to neighbouring countries and later attempt to come to the UK via the Channel would be subject to the government’s “crackdown” on small boat crossings.Ms Atkins told BBC Breakfast: “This is the great challenge we are facing in other parts of our immigration system – trying to stop these gangs exploiting people, vulnerable people, by bringing them over in small boats over the Channel.”She added: “Our message has been, please, please do not travel here illegally. The quid pro quo is that we will offer safe and legal routes. And that’s precisely what we are doing with the Afghan resettlement scheme. We’ve got to do this in an orderly and legal way.”Earlier this year a group of a group of 450 immigration experts condemned the British government’s attempt to create a division between “legal” and “illegal” routes by “vilifying” asylum seekers who have no option but to travel by irregular means.The academics’ letter stated: “These are not illegal journeys … under international law one cannot travel illegally if one is seeking asylum.”Defence secretary Ben Wallace last night told MPs about the ongoing effort to assist up to 300 Afghan staff, and around 700 of their dependents, who missed out on evacuation before the final Western troops left Kabul airport.Mr Wallace said Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials have been instructed to use phone calls and messages to get into contact with as many of them as possible – calling it “Dunkirk by WhatsApp”.It comes as No 10 confirmed that Boris Johnson’s representative for Afghan transition was in Doha to meet with Taliban representatives to discuss the fate of British nationals and Afghan staff left behind.Shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy said she and fellow Labour MPs were “fielding thousands of cases” of Afghans with ties to Britain who remain trapped in Afghanistan. “We’ve got high profile public figures, particularly women, moving from safe house to safe house being hunted by the Taliban,” she said.Ms Atkins suggested talks in Doha would be aimed at helping them find safe routes out of the country. “There have been leaks from the defence secretary – I think he’s called it Dunkirk by WhatsApp. We’re trying to reach people as best we can.”She said discussions about particular routes out would remain private. “Explaining evacuation routes on national television is probably not a great idea. It’s a volatile situation and fast moving,” she told the BBC.Meanwhile, the Home Office’s plan to resettle Afghan refugees has come under fire from local councils who say they have been left “scrambling” to meet the needs of new arrivals due to a “lack of clarity” from the government.“At least one-third of councils have given firm offers [of accommodation], and we are in conversations with many more,” said Ms Atkins.The minister added: “We would like to permanent accommodation, but we have to be realistic that the scale of the task is such that we simply don’t have permanent housing available to people.”A letter from Labour ministers to home secretary Priti Patel, seen by The Independent, has also warned that the government must “step up and play its role in providing national coordination, leadership and support” to local authorities.Conservative leader of Stoke on Trent city council questioned why more local authorities are not helping with Afghan evacuees. Abi Brown told Radio 4’s Today programme: “How could you not watch those scenes on the television over the last few weeks and put [themselves] forward over this?” More

UK embassy officials in Afghanistan told Afghans to go to Kabul airport’s Abbey Gate entrance only hours before a deadly suicide bombing attack in the area, according to a report.The British embassy instructed some people trying to flee the country to “use the Abbey Gate [near] to the Baron Hotel” last Thursday, the day of the attack, emails have shown.The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) had changed its advice last Wednesday, advising that people leave Kabul airport because of the “high threat” of a terrorist attack.The UK government said it was now investigating the emails to work out how messages “against this advice” could have been sent to Afghans.Emails seen by BBC’s Newsnight show Afghans eligible for evacuation were told to head for Abbey Gate hours before the attack – with one women describing the advice as “confusing and conflicting”.Another unnamed Afghan, a former interpreter, told the BBC he decided not to ignore advice telling him to be at Abbey Gate because he did not “feel safe.” He added: “It would be madness to go there and that saved my life. It was our own judgement that saved our lives.”The FCDO had updated its advice on 25 August, stating: “There is an ongoing and high threat of terrorist attack. Do not travel to Kabul Hamid Karzai International Airport. If you are in the area of the airport, move away to a safe location and await further advice.”The UK’s armed forces minister James Heappey said on the morning of 26 August, the day of the twin suicide bombings, that people should stay away from airport. He warned that the threat of an attack was “credible and imminent”.Almost 200 people were killed in the suicide bombing attack at the outside Kabul airport’s Abbey Gate area – including two UK citizens and 13 US soldiers.US forces decided to keep Abbey Gate entrance open longer than they wanted to allow British officials to continue evacuating personnel, according to leaked claims from the Pentagon.But both No 10 and foreign secretary Dominic Raab have said it was “just not true” to suggest the UK had called for Abbey Gate to be left open for part of its exit operation.A UK government spokesperson said: “We did all we could to get individuals to safety in incredibly difficult and changing circumstances.“We changed travel advice as soon as an increased terror threat was established and ensured that all call handlers communicated this advice as well as making it clear on the ground where we advised the crowds to disperse.The government spokesperson added: “We are investigating how an email against this advice could have been sent.”It comes as No 10 confirmed that Boris Johnson’s representative for Afghan transition was in Doha to meet with Taliban representatives to discuss the fate of British nationals and Afghan staff who missed out on evacuation before the final Western troops left Kabul airport.Defence secretary Ben Wallace told MPs that Ministry of Defence (MoD) officials have been instructed to use phone calls and messages to get into contact with as many of them as possible – calling it “Dunkirk by WhatsApp”.Meanwhile, foreign secretary Dominic Raab prepares to endure a 90-minute grilling from the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday afternoon.Labour’s shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy said Mr Raab was responsible for “the biggest foreign policy failing in a generation”, and demanded his resignation should he fail to tell MPs how he intended to put it right. More

Boris Johnson’s government intends to press ahead with plans to introduce Covid vaccine passports for nightclubs from the end of September, despite concerns from MPs and leaders in the hospitality industry.The prime minister’s official spokesperson said on Tuesday that the plans for the scheme, which was announced in July, are still in place.“We set out broadly our intention to require our vaccination for nightclubs and some other settings and we’ll be coming forward in the coming weeks with details for that,” they said.The scheme will see members of the public required to show proof of their vaccine status to gain entry into domestic venues and events.It follows speculation that the plans might have been dropped after a backlash from Conservative backbench MPs and industry leaders, who have warned that such rules could see venues lose money.On Tuesday, Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey said his party would oppose the scheme, while Labour has previously criticised the plans as “unworkable”.“As predicted the government has reheated their Covid ID card scheme,” Sir Ed wrote on Twitter.“They are divisive, unworkable and expensive and the Liberal Democrats will oppose them.”The admission came as The Guardian reported that new data showed some people would be more reluctant to get vaccinated if such passports were introduced.Analysis of 16,527 people, 14,543 of whom had not yet had both vaccine doses, found that almost 90 per cent (87.8 per cent) said their decision to receive a second dose would not be affected by the introduction of the passport scheme.Two-thirds of the remaining 12.2 per cent suggested that they would be less likely to get vaccinated if passports were introduced, while the remaining third said they would be more inclined.The study’s lead author, Dr Alex de Figueiredo, from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said these percentages would be significant if scaled up to the whole population, according to The Guardian.The research, which will be published in the Lancet journal EClinicalMedicine, also warns that the proposals are potentially divisive.“This creates a risk of creating a divided society wherein the majority are relatively secure but there remain pockets of lower vaccination where outbreaks can still occur,” the authors wrote in the paper.Additional reporting by PA More

The UK government is in talks with the Taliban over the safe passage of British nationals out of Afghanistan following the withdrawal of western troops from the country, Downing Street has said.No 10 confirmed on Tuesday that Boris Johnson’s special representative for Afghan transition was in Qatar to meet with senior Taliban representatives to discuss the issue.“The prime minister’s special representative for Afghan transition, Simon Gass, has travelled to Doha and is meeting with senior Taliban representatives to underline the importance of safe passage out of Afghanistan for British nationals, and those Afghans who have worked with us over the past 20 years,” a Downing Street spokesperson said.It came after the foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, said that the number of British nationals left behind in Afghanistan was in the “low hundreds” – although he was unable to give a “definitive” figure.“It’s very difficult to give you a firm figure. I can tell you that for UK nationals we’ve secured since April over 5,000, and we’re in the low hundreds [remaining],” Mr Raab told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.The UK’s 20-year military campaign in Afghanistan ended last week as the final UK flight carrying British troops left Kabul airport.More than 15,000 people, including about 2,200 children, have been evacuated by the UK since 14 August, but there are concerns about what will happen to the hundreds of British nationals and eligible Afghans who were unable to leave the country.The British government insisted on Tuesday that UK and Afghan nationals would be offered extra help to escape Afghanistan over land borders following the conclusion of the emergency airlift.Fifteen crisis response specialists are being deployed to Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to assist British diplomats in their work to allow people to reach the UK.They are expected to arrive within the next 48 hours, with a focus on helping UK nationals, interpreters and other Afghans who were employed by the UK, and those Afghans judged most at risk.On Sunday, Mr Johnson insisted that the Taliban would need to offer safe passage to those still in Afghanistan in order to receive diplomatic recognition, as he pledged to engage with the new government “not on the basis of what they say, but what they do”.“If the new regime in Kabul wants diplomatic recognition, or to unlock the billions that are currently frozen, they will have to ensure safe passage for those who wish to leave the country, to respect the rights of women and girls, to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming an incubator for global terror,” the prime minister said. Additional reporting by PA More

Boris Johnson’s government has rejected calls from senior politicians in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to keep the £20-per-week universal credit uplift in place.Work and pensions secretary Therese Coffey told cross-party committees from the four nations that the cut will go ahead as planned next month – leaving millions of Britons £1,040 a year worse off.The cabinet minister confirmed that the increase brought in during the Covid crisis would be axed from 6 October, despite mounting pressure from MPs in all parties to maintain the payment on a permanent basis.“Now the economy has reopened it is right that the government should focus on supporting people back into work and supporting those already employed to progress in their careers,” Ms Coffey replied in a joint letter to ministers.The work and pensions secretary added: “Our ambition is to support 2 million people to move into and progress in work through our comprehensive £33bn Plan for Jobs.”The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has said the universal credit cut will push 500,000 people into poverty, while Citizens Advice has warned that a third of people in receipt of the benefit will be pushed into debt when the uplift is removed.Cross-party committees from Westminster, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the Welsh Senedd and the Scottish parliament raised concerns about the impact the reduction would have on poverty.In a joint letter to Ms Coffey, they argued that millions of people would lose £1,000 a year “at time when they need financial support the most”. They also branded the change as the “biggest overnight reduction to a basic rate of social security since the modern welfare state began”.Stephen Timms, the Labour MP and chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, said the government must “change course to prevent severe hardship for many thousands of families”.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 by the party yet.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.“Our central promise at the last election, that you articulated so well, was to level up,” they wrote – describing the £20-a-week boost as “one of our best legacies from the pandemic”.In July, six former Tory work and pensions secretaries wrote to the government to say the uplift have proved “vital” to protect incomes and warn any cut could threaten the economic recovery.As well as the letter from cross-party committees, ministers from Holyrood, Cardiff and Stormont also wrote to Ms Coffey to raised concerns about the impact the universal credit reduction would have on poverty.Scotland’s social justice secretary Shona Robison, Welsh social justice minister Jane Hutt and Northern Ireland’s communities minister Deirdre Hargey said people will lose money “at time when they need financial support the most”.Ms Coffey has previously suggested that the £1,000-a-year cut would help encourage some people back into work, with the government saying it was focused on its Plan For Jobs scheme to boost training.A UK government spokeswoman 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.“It’s right that we now focus on our Plan for Jobs, helping claimants to increase their earnings by boosting their skills and getting into work, progressing in work or increasing their hours.” More

There is an “undeniable” mandate in Scotland for a second independence referendum following the Scottish government’s power-sharing deal with the Green Party, the country’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon has said.The agreement, which has now been endorsed by both parties, will see the Scottish Greens form part of a government for the first time anywhere in the UK.Ms Sturgeon told Holyrood on Tuesday that a “key strand” of the deal would be fulfilling what she said was the “democratic mandate to let the Scottish people choose our own future”, alongside dealing with issues such as climate change and the recovery from Covid-19.“The mandate for that is undeniable – between us, the SNP and the Greens hold 72 of the 129 seats in this parliament and each one of us was elected on a commitment to an independence referendum,” the SNP leader said.“The decisions that will shape our society and economy and our place in the world must be determined, democratically, here in Scotland and not imposed upon us, so often against our will, by government at Westminster.”Ms Sturgeon added that the agreement between the two parties was not a formal coalition, as the SNP and the Greens would “retain distinct voices and independent identities”.However, she argued that the deal was “genuinely ground-breaking” as it will see Green members work in a national government as ministers for the first time.In response, Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross branded the agreement as a “nationalist coalition with one overriding goal – separating Scotland from the United Kingdom”.“Trying to claim that this is not a coalition, that is quite simply a joke even by SNP standards,” he said.The Scottish Tory leader also accused Ms Sturgeon’s government of allowing the deal to take priority over the programme for government, which is usually announced when MSPs return after the summer recess to set out ministers’ plans for the next 12 months.Mr Ross added: “This is not a deal that works for Scotland. This is a deal that works for Nicola Sturgeon.“She failed to get a majority and this deal is a consequence of that.”Meanwhile, Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said that the agreement did not represent a positive change for the country and simply formalised the situation in the last parliament, where he said SNP policy was supported by the Greens.“This is no new government, this is not a clean start, this is a deal that more about the constitution, not the climate,” Mr Sarwar said.“It’s about greater control for Nicola Sturgeon and the SNP, not co-operation.”He argued ministers should instead be focused on tackling issues such as unemployment, child poverty, the country’s drugs deaths crisis and tackling the backlog that has built up within the NHS.Additional reporting by PA More