Markus Andrews

Labour has hit out at the government’s Afghan resettlement programme, suggesting the number of refugees being accepted is too low and the process too slow.This comes after ministers announced that the UK will take 20,000 people from Afghanistan, 5,000 of whom will arrive this year.Speaking in the Commons on Wednesday, Labour MP Chris Bryant criticised the scope of the Afghan Citizens’ Resettlement Scheme, which was announced after Kabul fell to the Taliban on Sunday.The backbencher called into question the safety of those who will not reach the UK this year. “What are the 15,000 meant to do? Hang around and wait until they have been executed?” he asked the prime minister.In response, Boris Johnson claimed Britain was playing its part in the unfolding humanitarian crisis. He later added that an additional 5,000 refugees would come to Britain this year under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap), a separate initiative helping local allies.However, the government does not have the backing of all its MPs, with former defence minister Tobias Ellwood describing the new scheme as “woefully inadequate”.The Bournemouth East MP told the Daily Mirror that ministers needed to acknowledge responsibility for events in Afghanistan and understand the scale of the crisis. “We are capping the numbers to 5,000 for the first year, when the threat is at its greatest,” he said.Opposition parties were also quick to criticise the government for its immigration plan. Shadow home secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds said it risked leaving people in “deadly danger”, while the Liberal Democrats leader Ed Davey urged Mr Johnson to increase the offer.Meanwhile, Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader in Westminster, said the government should welcome 40,000 Afghan refugees, double the current target.Concerns have also been expressed about the level of support Afghan refugees will receive when they arrive in Britain.Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham said on Tuesday that his area would not turn its back on those in need.” “But what we are going to do is to continue to make the case that actually, if we’re really a caring country, we need to make sure we put the proper resources and systems in to be able to support these people very quickly, get them out of hotels and get them into homes,” he said. More

A former Conservative international development minister has criticised Afghans for “queuing at the airport” in Kabul to flee the Taliban.Tory MP Sir Desmond Swayne challenged Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer if he would flee his country if the UK were overthrown by a “wicked and brutal regime”.New Forest West MP Sir Desmond asked: “Were the government of this kingdom to be overthrown by a wicked and brutal regime, I venture that he would want a leading role in the resistance, he wouldn’t be queuing at the airport would he?”While some MPs shouted “disgrace” at Sir Desmond’s remarks, while the Labour leader hit back – saying he would not “take that” from the former Tory minister.“When I was director of public prosecutions I had some of my prosecutors in Afghanistan at huge risk working on counterterrorism with other brave souls there. So I won’t take that from him or anybody else,” said Sir Keir.Labour MPs were swift to condemn Sir Desmond’s remarks suggesting cowardice on the part of Afghans. Yasmin Qureshi said she was “disgusted” by his comments, while fellow backbencher Charlotte Nichols tweeted: “Absolutely vile intervention from Sir Desmond Swayne … the lack of humanity is staggering.”Speaking during Wednesday’s debate in the Commons, the Labour leader accused Boris Johnson of “appalling” judgement and called on the prime minister to “snap out of his complacency” to deal with the crisis.He said Mr Johnson’s initial response to the Taliban “arriving at the gate of Kabul was to go on holiday”. Sir Keir also claimed Mr Johnson’s last visit to Afghanistan while foreign secretary was motivated by his desire to “avoid a vote on Heathrow”.Referring to foreign secretary Dominic Raab’s recent trip to Cyprus, cut short on Sunday, the Labour leader said: “The foreign secretary shakes his head, I wouldn’t have stayed on holiday”.Sir Keir added: “You cannot coordinate an international response from the beach” – accusing both Mr Raab and Mr Johnson of a “dereliction of duty”.Referring to defence secretary Ben Wallace’s claim that some Afghans working with the British officials “won’t get back” from the country, Sir Keir said: “The defence secretary has said that some people who worked with us will not get back. Unconscionable.”The Labour leader added: “The government must outline a plan to work with our allies to do everything that’s possible to ensure that does not happen.”The leader of the opposition also addressed those veterans and their families, especially the families of those who died. “Your sacrifice was not in vain, you brought stability, reduced the terrorist threat and enabled progress – we are all proud of what you did.”Sir Keir added: “Your sacrifice deserves better than this and so do the Afghan people. There’s been a major miscalculation of the resilience of the Afghan forces and a staggering complacency from our government about the Taliban threat.”The government has been accused of not moving quickly enough after it said it would take up to 20,000 refugees over the “long term” – but only 5,000 in the first year. Sir Keir said the government’s scheme failed to “meet the scale of the enormous challenge”.Backbencher MPs also raised concerns about the numbers of refugees being accepted from Afghanistan, asking whether those left behind will have to “hang around and wait until they have been executed”.Labour MP Chris Bryant asked: “The home secretary announced this morning that 20,000 – that the UK will be taking 20,000 refugees from Afghanistan – but that only 5,000 will be able to come this year. What are the 15,000 meant to do? Hang around and wait until they have been executed?”Former PM Theresa May has criticised the government’s “incomprehensible” failure to bring together an alternative alliance to prevent the collapse of the Afghan government. “We boast about Global Britain, but where is Global Britain on the streets of Kabul?”Fellow Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat – a former soldier who served in Afghanistan – was applauded following an emotional speech in the Commons.Mr Tugendhat ended by recalling his time as an advisor to the governor of Helmand and the “joy” given to families by the opening of schools for girls, adding: “I didn’t understand it until I took my own daughter to school about a year ago.”He added: “There was a lot of crying when she first went in, but I got over it and it went OK. I’d love to see that continue.” More

Fresh questions have been raised about the economic of Scottish independence after official figures showed the country’s public finances has an unprecedented black hole.Scotland’s deficit more than doubled to 22.4 per cent of GDP in 2020/21 – the highest yearly figure since the government’s annual accounts began two decades ago.Public spending in Scotland increased by 21 per cent during the year, reflecting the impact of the pandemic, while average public spending per person rose to £1,828 above the UK average.First minister and SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon insisted the deficit was “not a barrier” to independence – arguing that the current fiscal position is not any indication of what life would be like if the country was to break from the UK.But Tory MP Alister Jack, Scottish secretary in Boris Johnson’s cabinet, claimed the figures showed “how all of us in Scotland have benefitted from being part of a strong United Kingdom”.The figures were revealed in the Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) report published by the Scottish government – the annual study which always sparks fierce debate on the economic case for independence.Total public expenditure in Scotland for the financial year gone by, covering both Scottish and UK government spending and the rest of the public sector, was £99.2bn.As well as the impact of coronavirus, the fiscal position was also affected by declining activity in the North Sea and a fall in oil prices.This is equivalent to 9.1 per cent of total UK public sector expenditure, or £18,144 per person – which is £1,828 per person greater than the UK average.Ms Sturgeon insisted the case had not been damaged. “Having a deficit is not – self-evidently – a barrier to any country in the world being independent,” she said.The SNP leader added: “Almost every country has a deficit and deficits that have grown and become massive over the course of the pandemic because, rightly, governments have chosen to support the economy and to support individuals.“Independent countries manage their deficits but also independent countries make the most of their talents and their resources and their attributes to build strong, sustainable economies, and that is – I think – the future that Scotland should grasp.”Tory MSP Murdo Fraser, the party’s shadow Covid recovery secretary, said the figures show the extent of the UK government’s “war chest” of support during the pandemic, such as the furlough scheme.“These new figures demonstrate the strength and security that we gain as part of the United Kingdom,” said Mr Fraser. “In times of crisis, when a pandemic hits, Scottish jobs and public services are safer because we act together.”Scottish Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesperson Christine Jardine MP also said the UK was “stronger when we pull together”, adding: “These blistering figures drive home just how economically valuable the partnership across these isles is.” More

A Tory MP who served in Afghanistan has made an emotive speech to parliament, saying he has suffered through “anger, grief and rage” as he witnessed the country falling to the Taliban. Tom Tugendhat told MPs it “does not have to be defeat” but “damn well feels like it” in an emergency sitting to discuss events in Afghanistan. The Taliban took over the country at the weekend after a rapid offensive saw it seize control of major cities and move into Kabul on Sunday.“Like many veterans, this last week which been one which has seen me struggle through anger and grief and rage,” Mr Tugendhat told MPs on Wednesday. “The feeling of abandonment of not just a country, but of the sacrifice that my friends made.”The MP, who chairs the foreign affairs select committee, said: “I have been to funerals from Poole to Dunblane. I have watched good men go into the earth, taking with them a part of me and a part of all of us.“This week has torn open some of those wounds. Left them raw, left us all hurting.”Mr Tugendhat said it was with “great sadness” that he was to criticise the US, noting: “To see their commander in chief call into the question the courage of men I fought with, to claim that they ran is shameful.”Those who have not fought for the colours they fly should be careful about criticising those who have.”Tory politicians have criticised Joe Biden’s speech justifying his decision to pull troops out of Afghanistan, in which the US president argued the country’s political leaders “gave up and fled the country” rather than resisting the insurgents.Mr Biden had said: “The Afghan military collapsed, sometimes without trying to fight. American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in a war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves.”Mr Tugendhat also told parliament on Wednesday: “We need to turn out attention to those who are in desperate need.”He also described how a man once walked into a base with a child who had died hours earlier, begging for help.“There was nothing we could do. It was over. Because Mr Speaker, this is what defeat looks like. It is when you no longer have the choice of how to help,” he said.“This doesn’t need to be defeat. But at the moment, it damn well feels like it.”MPs have praised Mr Tugendhat for his speech, with Tory colleague Dehenna Davison saying it was “one I will remember for the rest of my life”. Labour’s Wes Streeting wrote: “Britain is very fortunate to have soldiers like TomTugendhat and parliament is very lucky to have his wisdom and experience leading the Foreign Affairs Committee. Magnificent and moving speech during the Afghanistan debate.”And Liberal Democrat MP Jamie Stone posted: “A most extraordinary, moving speech from my brave colleague Tom Tugendhat.” More

The UK will judge the Taliban regime on its “actions, rather than by its words” after its promises of an amnesty and to protect women’s rights, Boris Johnson has said.Opening an emergency debate, the prime minister faced criticism from MPs for the chaotic withdrawal from Kabul – and for being on holiday at the weekend, when the capital fell.But he insisted the UK did “forsee” the Taliban takeover, although the speed of it had come as a surprise.Mr Johnson insisted the “hard reality” was that Western nations had no option but to pull out without “US logistics, without US airpower and American might”.And, on the Taliban’s promises, he told MPs: “We will judge this regime based on the choices it makes and on its actions, rather than by its words.”The prime minister said the situation in Kabul had “stabilised”, although it remained “precarious”, telling MPs: “At the moment it would be fair to say that the Taliban are allowing that evacuation to go ahead.”But he was criticised for the scale of the UK’s offer to refugees – admitting just 5,000 in the first year, with another 15,000 in “the long-term” from third countries.“What are the 15,000 meant to do? Wait around and wait to be executed?” asked Labour MP Chris Bryant.On the weekend chaos, Mr Johnson pointed to preparations to withdraw UK nationals having gone on for “many months”, claiming it was “not true to say the UK government did not forsee this”.Labour’s Angela Eagle told him:: “He seemed to be making an argument earlier that he had anticipated something.“Why then were he and the foreign secretary both on their holidays when this happened?”Keir Starmer said the lack of preparation was underlined by a defence review, in March, containing “two passing references to Afghanistan” and none to the Taliban.“The very problems we are confronting in this debate were all known problems for 18 months and there has been a failure to prepare,” the Labour leader alleged.At a surreal press conference on Tuesday, the Taliban spokesman took questions from female journalists, claiming the regime was “committed to the rights of women”, but “within our framework of sharia”.Mr Johnson defended the withdrawal, saying: “The West could not continue this US-led mission, a mission conceived and executed in support of America.“I really think that it is an illusion to believe that there is appetite amongst any of our partners for a continued military presence, or for a military solution imposed by Nato in Afghanistan. That idea ended with the combat mission in 2014.”The prime minister added: “We must deal with the position as it is now, accepting what we have achieved and what we have not achieved.” More

Many MPs – including Tory front benchers – were seen without face masks in a crowded parliament after the House was recalled to debate the situation in Afghanistan.Key figures in government – including the prime minister, the foreign secretary and the heath secretary – chose not to wear a face covering as they sat near each other on benches on Wednesday morning. Most MPs on the Conservative’s side of parliament appeared to not wear as face mask.Meanwhile, the vast majority on the opposition’s side wore a face mask as the sitting on Afghanistan – which saw a crowded parliament return from its summer recess – started. However, Sir Keir Starmer, Labour’s leader, did not. Parliament gathered for an emergency sitting three days after the Afghan capital fell to the Taliban.The UK government has come under intense pressure over the handling of the downfall of the Western-backed government and the subsequent evacuation of British nationals and local allies.Face masks have not been a requirement indoors since 19 July after a host of Covid restrictions were lifted. However, guidance says the public are “expected and recommended to continue wearing a face covering in crowded and enclosed spaces where you come into contact with people you don’t usually meet”. “You should use your judgement in deciding where you should wear one,” official guidance says. More

Priti Patel has claimed the UK cannot accommodate 20,000 refugees “all in one go” amid criticism of the new scheme that is expected to offer sanctuary to just 5,000 vulnerable people in its first year.Unveiled last night, the government said the Afghanistan citizen resettlement scheme will aim to provide refuge to 20,000 fleeing persecution from the Taliban forces in the “long term”.Ministers suggested the new scheme was modelled on the Syrian vulnerable persons resettlement scheme, which relocated 20,000 Syrian refugees over a seven-year period from 2014 to 2021.But on Tuesday evening opposition parties criticised the “vague” promise to help 20,000 Afghans in the longer term — insisting the figure should be the government’s immediate target.The former Conservative cabinet minister David Davis also insisted the UK should be looking to accept “north of 50,000” vulnerable people.Speaking on Sky News, the home secretary said it was important to have a scheme the government “can deliver”, adding: “We have to think very carefully about the practicalities.”“Importantly with the new humanitarian route we are announcing today, we have to ensure that we, clearly, have all the support structures across the United Kingdom.“We will be working with local councils around the country, with the devolved governments as well, to ensure that we can support those people. This isn’t just about bringing people over, this is about resettlement.”Pressed on why the government wasn’t aiming to offer sanctuary to more in the immediate term, Ms Patel replied: “Primarily because we cannot accommodate 20,000 all in one go.”The home secretary said she had spoken with her Canadian counterparts on Tuesday evening, who told her a similar pledge by their government to resettle 20,000 people was an “aspiration”, which includes locally employed staff.She declined, however, to reveal when the UK would receive the first refugees under the scheme, saying she was “not going to give a date”.In a separate interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Ms Patel insisted “you can’t just press a button on this scheme”, highlighting that it would “take time”.Pressed on whether Afghanistan citizens fleeing the country and arriving by boat would be treated differently compared to last week or still risk being criminalised, she added: “This isn’t about being criminalised if they’ve come over from Afghanistan.“They will claim asylum in the way in which people who enter our system are currently claiming asylum, but I have to say when it comes to people coming from Afghanistan, I think it’s important to separate what is going on in Afghanistan — we are making big changes.”“We would obviously tell people not to come through illegal means,” Ms Patel stressed.“It also means they are travelling through many safe countries — irregular migration doesn’t just manifest in the UK, people are travelling through Europe countries, they can claim asylum in European countries, in safe countries”.Ms Patel stressed, however, that the government’s immediate priority was evacuating British nationals from the region and Afghans granted visas, including those who have worked alongside UK troops in the 20-year conflict.While the government’s aim is to rescue 5,000 people under this separate scheme, which was announced earlier this year, the cabinet minister also revealed many more could be airlifted to safety.Pressed on whether the figure could reach 10,000, the cabinet minister said: “There could be up to 10,000. We are expanding categories right now and we’re working with the MoD [Ministry of Defence] on the ground to identify these people”.“We are working night and day. I am sending in Home Office officials, border force officials, to the region to help support this scheme as well.”Ms Patel then added there could be “more” than 10,000, saying: “There absolutely could be.” More

The Scottish government is considering making its temporary coronavirus powers permanent, which would allow it to impose lockdowns, close schools and release prisoners early. A change in the law would allow Holyrood to respond to any future public health threats more “effectively and rapidly”, according to consultation published by the government. The powers — which also include the ability to move court sessions online and allow a wider range of healthcare workers to administer vaccines — would be deployed when “necessary and proportionate”, ministers say, but the Conservatives have accused them of being “unwilling to give up their control over people’s lives”. Currently, the additional powers are set to end in March 2022, but can be extended by six months with Holyrood backing. The government is seeking the public’s views on the possible permanent expansion, which they say could help to “protect the people of Scotland” from “any incidence or spread of infection” that could harm them even beyond Covid-19. Some caveats would apply: schools would only shut with the sign off of the chief medical officer, for instance, while ministers would report to parliament every two months on the use of the powers. Allowing the early release of prisoners would also likely carry caveats: currently, inmates can be released up to 90 days early to alleviate pressure on prison as long as they haven’t committed harassment or domestic violence offences. Prison governors can also veto specific prisoners they believe could pose a risk to someone. The government’s consultation also recommends a permanent online shift to some processes which were digitised during the pandemic, such as council meetings, court documents and registering still births and deaths. Commenting on the consultation, deputy first minister John Swinney said that Scotland has a “unique opportunity” to “reimagine health and social care”. “We want to ensure we remove measures no longer needed in order to respond to the pandemic whilst keeping those where there is demonstrable benefit to the people of Scotland,” he said. “This is an opportunity to maintain changes that have been welcomed by people who now don’t want to lose transformations that have been innovative, beneficial, and increased access to services.” The consultation has, however, been criticised by the Conservatives.Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser said: ““The fact that SNP ministers are now seeking to make many of [the powers] permanent is a clear sign they are unwilling to give up their control over people’s lives.“It is a dangerous route to go down to allow ministers to implement sweeping powers upon society on a whim.”The public have until 9 November to share their views with the government on the matter. More