Markus Andrews

The government has denied creating confusion over the wearing of masks in shops and public transport, with the communities secretary saying it was right to let people use “personal judgement”.New guidance says the government still “expects” shoppers to wear masks when curbs in England end on July 19, despite no longer being required by law – a policy criticised as a “real mess” by businesses and unions.It comes as regional mayors urged ministers to keep masks compulsory across all public transport services in England to avoid a “ridiculous mismatch” of rules from Monday.Communities secretary Robert Jenrick praised Sadiq Khan for the insisting on mandatory mask-wearing on the Transport for London (TfL) services – despite previously saying he personally would no longer wear a mask when the legal requirement ended.“You can already see TFL, that manages the Tube in London, have come to, in my opinion, a perfectly sensible judgement that in the confines of the Tube you should be using a mask,” he told Sky News on Thursday.He later told GB News: “If I’m asked to wear a mask … for example if I was catching the tram in Wolverhampton, and that was the rules, I would certainly wear a mask.”Asked earlier this month if he would stop wearing a mask from 19 July, Mr Jenrick said: “I will. I don’t particularly want to wear a mask. I don’t think a lot of people enjoy doing it.”The latest guidance document for businesses says the government “expects and recommends” masks to be worn by workers and customers in enclosed spaces. Table service is recommended to continue in bars, while hospitality industry is encouraged to check vaccine and testing status.Paddy Lillis, the general secretary of the shop union Usdaw, said the policy was a “real mess” while Dr Roger Barker, policy director at the Institute of Directors, said businesses bosses are “understandably confused” over “a series of mixed messages and patchwork requirements”.But Mr Jenrick denied the policy amounted to a “total shambles” when he appeared on ITV’s Good Morning Britain, arguing businesses would get to choose what was right “for their setting”. Asked on Sky News if the government had created uncertainty for businesses, Mr Jenrick said: “There might be situations where businesses might choose to pursue these policies based on their best judgement … this is the sort of discretion they want.”After Sainsbury’s said it would ask customers to keep wearing masks, Mr Jenrick said “some supermarkets” were coming to the decision that it was sensible to keep face coverings rules in place.“Waterstones, who I understand will be asking their customers to wear masks … that seems a logical decision,” he said, adding: “We trust businesses just as we trust the public to come to sensible, reasonable positions.”Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, said masks would be mandatory on the region’s tram services. It follows Mr Khan’s move to require masks on the Tube and buses in the capital.Labour metro mayors for West Yorkshire, Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, North of Tyne, West of England and South Yorkshire warned that without a continued national mandate there would be a “ridiculous mismatch” of rules across the country. More

Economists are warning that Boris Johnson’s much-heralded “levelling up” agenda must amount to more than quick-fix improvements to disadvantaged areas of the Midlands and north of England if it is to make an impression on the UK’s entrenched social inequalities.The prime minister will on Thursday attempt to put some flesh on the bones of his oft-repeated slogan, using a speech in the West Midlands to say that he aims to restore a sense of “pride in their community” among residents of areas that have felt left-behind for decades.But with MP Neil O’Brien appointed to advise Mr Johnson on the strategy only 10 weeks ago and firm proposals not not expected until a white paper in the autumn, the speech is expected to be light on firm announcements and heavy on rhetoric.Extracts released by Downing Street ahead of the speech said that Mr Johnson will say that the drive to boost “left-behind” areas will also relieve pressure on parts of the UK where an “over-heating” economy has delivered sky-high housing costs, overcrowding and congested transport systems.But he will also insist that levelling up the Midlands and north will not mean “levelling down” in the south of England. And, following the by-election loss of Chesham & Amersham driven in part by a voter revolt against planning reforms, he will promise that the agenda will not mean leafy suburbs and villages being “engulfed by new housing development”.“We don’t want to decapitate the tall poppies,” Mr Johnson will say. “We don’t think you can make the poor parts of the country richer by making the rich parts poorer.“Levelling up is not a jam-spreading operation. It’s not robbing Peter to pay Paul. It’s not zero-sum, it’s win-win.”Mr Johnson will argue that previous governments have “turbo-charged” London and the southeast by concentrating investment in areas which were already doing well economically.“By turbo-charging those areas – especially in London and the southeast – you drive prices even higher and you force more and more people to move to the same expensive areas,” he will say.“And the result is that their commutes are longer, their trains are more crowded, they have less time with their kids. They worry at the same time that the younger generation won’t be able to get a home and that their leafy suburb or village will be engulfed by new housing development but without the infrastructure to go with it.”Setting out the metric by which he wants his agenda to be judged, he will say: “We will have made progress in levelling up when we have begun to raise living standards, spread opportunity, improved our public services and restored people’s sense of pride in their community.”But research economist Ben Zaranko, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, told The Independent that change on this scale could take decades to materialise.“The UK is one of the more regionally unequal countries in the industrial world, perhaps the most unequal,” he said. “The scale of the challenge is huge and it is not something you can just make a big speech on, throw some money around and expect change overnight.“There are things the prime minister can do in the short term to make places nicer to live in – renovating high streets, building facilities and so on. That can be achieved relatively quickly with centralised pots of money like the Towns Fund.“But that stuff isn’t going to deal with the deeper, more structural inequalities that are driving differential living standards across the country. Those are things that I don’t think you can make much progress on in the course of a parliament. It’s deep-seated economic changes in areas like education, skills training, transport connectivity and so on which could take decades to complete.”Research suggested that the perception that certain areas had been “left behind” was driven in part by austerity imposed over the past decade of Tory-led governments, he said.“The prime minister’s talk about levelling up does jar a little in that context,” he said.“Spending by local authorities on cultural facilities has fallen by about 50 per cent in real terms since 2010, spending on planning by 60 per cent. It’s all very well him saying that he’s going to turn the taps on, but part of the reason why these things are an issue is because they have been squeezed for the last decade.”The director of the Centre for Progressive Policy, Charlotte Alldritt, said that recent policy decisions – like the allocation of just £1.4bn to an educational catch-up programme costed at £15bn by the man appointed to devise it – cast doubt on whether Mr Johnson was committed to the “long haul” of spreading equality. “The scale of the challenge is vast,” Ms Alldritt told The Independent. “This has been decades in the making. We have very deep and entrenched health, wealth, income and education inequalities in our society which hold back the economy and hold back people’s life chances.“The prime minister could start looking at the foundations for addressing this, but I don’t think he will. I think the government is very much motivated by generating clear tangible results over the next 18 months before a spring 2023 election, which means ‘quick wins’ on things like high streets and leisure facilities.“Tackling the fundamental issues on a scale which people would actually notice would be a very, very difficult task which would take much longer. I’m expecting to see a fragmented approach that doesn’t live up to the scale of the challenge. The levelling up agenda does have potential, but unless it is really gripped more strategically, it will fall short.” More

David Frost says he understands why businesses are abandoning trade with Northern Ireland because his Brexit agreement has made it “too much trouble” to carry on.The negotiator of the deal – which created a border in the Irish Sea – admitted he had not fully foreseen the “chilling effect” of the punishing new red tape, which has left smaller firms facing higher costs.There are “companies in Great Britain who decide that it’s all too much trouble, reasonably enough – can’t be bothered to engage with the process,” Lord Frost acknowledged.“They are often SMEs [small and medium-sized enterprises] and micro-businesses. Dealing with this is a significant call on their time and they decide it’s just not worth it,” he told a parliamentary inquiry.“That’s why you are seeing some of the trade diversion and supply-chain issues to Northern Ireland that we’re seeing.”The admission came ahead of Lord Frost unveiling a new “approach” to the Northern Ireland protocol next week, sparking fresh tensions with the EU.The government insists that the recent three-month truce over the sale of chilled meats and availability of medicines has failed to solve the crisis caused by the protocol.Brussels has been accused of “intransigence” in the ongoing talks and of a “lack of understanding of the sensitivities in Northern Ireland”.Questioned by a Lords committee, Lord Frost refused to set out what his new approach might entail – beyond the aim to make goods “flow as freely as possibly between Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.The Brexit minister also:* Claimed that increased cross-border trade between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is “a problem” he wanted to discourage.* Revealed he expected £500m to be spent on trader support services, saying: “That is the cost of the protocol.”* Rejected the EU’s insistence that there is no alternative to the protocol, pointing to a future consent vote at Stormont, and asking: “Then what is that vote about?”* Argued it would be “inconceivable” to press ahead with protocol-style arrangements after a no vote, warning: “The politics would be quite significant at that point.”The comments came as the fishing industry accused Tory MPs who had hyped the potential gains from Brexit of going “very quiet” as those benefits failed to materialise.The National Federation of Fisherman’s Organisations protested that nothing was now heard from even the “most vociferous supporters” on the Conservative benches.Peter Hain, the Labour former Northern Ireland secretary, warned that Lord Frost had lost the trust of unionists, nationalists, the EU and the Dublin government, saying sarcastically: “That’s a pretty successful negotiation, isn’t it?”The EU accuses the UK of failing to abide by the protocol – by introducing checks at Northern Irish ports and by supplying data on cross-sea trade – but London blames an over-zealous implementation. More

Britain has exported around three times as much weaponry and military equipment to fuel Saudi Arabia’s war in Yemen than previously thought, according to a groundbreaking new investigation. The government’s official figures say ministers signed off £6.7 billion worth of arms sales to the autocracy such a bombs, missiles, and aircraft since the country started its bombardment of neighbouring Yemen in 2015.But researchers drilling deeper into official records and those of arms manufacturers say the true figure is likely to be closer to £20 billion because the official numbers do not include sales conducted under an opaque “open licence” system.The UK government boasts about having “one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world” and publishes the value of arms exports approved under standard licences. It also details what kind of weapons were sold and who they were allowed to be sold to.But the government also operates a parallel, less transparent “open licence” system which give a more open-ended green light to manufacturers to sell specific armaments to a specific country without a monetary limit. Between 2014 and August 2019 the UK operated an open licence for bombs and air-to-surface missiles to Saudi Arabia, for a type repeatedly used in the war in Yemen.Separately, equipment and components for use in the Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft, also used in the same bombardment, have been covered by an open licence. The researchers also looked at the accounts of companies known to be selling arms to Saudi Arabia and found that the revenues to one company alone – BAE Systems – originating from the Saudi Ministry of Defence & Aviation, totalled nearly £17 billion over the relevant period.As a result they estimate that the real value of exports is close to £20 billion.”The use of open licences also offers the government a convenient sleight of hand when it comes under pressure over arms sales to a particular country due to events such as wars, military coups, or well-publicised human rights abuses,” the report warns.The Department for International Trade, which signs off all arms exports, did not dispute the findings of the study but said the UK “takes its export control responsibilities very seriously”.Katie Fallon of Campaign Against Arms Trade, which conducted the research, said: “The use of Open Licences covers up the real extent of the UK arms trade and makes it impossible to know what quantities of weapons are being sold around the world.”UK-made fighter jets, bombs and missiles have had a devastating impact in the ongoing bombardment of Yemen. The fact that the real total of these sales could be so much higher than previously reported emphasises the central role that the UK government and UK-based companies have played in the war. There must be full transparency about what arms have gone over and in what quantity.”So much of the arms industry takes place in secret, and that’s how the arms dealers like it. As long as the widespread use of Open Licences continues, the true nature and volume of the UK arms trade will remain hidden from scrutiny, and therefore from meaningful control.”The government was told by the Court of Appeal in June 2019 to stop sales to Saudi Arabia, after a judge said ministers had “made no concluded assessments of whether the Saudi-led coalition had committed violations of international humanitarian law in the past, during the Yemen conflict, and made no attempt to do so”.Thousands of civilians have been killed in Yemen and the country, with the situation in the country reduced to a humanitarian disaster. Saudi Arabia says it is intervening on behalf of the internationally recognised government of Yemen, which has not controlled the country’s capital nor most of its territory for some years. Targets reportedly hit by the airstrikes include schools, hospitals, weddings, and food factories.Trade secretary Liz Truss resumed arms exports to the country in July 2020 after a Department for International Trade analysis found that there was evidence that Saudi Arabian was committing war crimes. Ms Truss however reasoned that the analysis pointed to the war crimes being “isolated incidents” because they had been of such a variety. Human rights groups including Amnesty International branded the decision “deeply cynical”.Asked about the new research, a Department for International Trade spokesperson said: “The UK takes its export control responsibilities very seriously and operates one of the most robust and transparent export control regimes in the world. “We rigorously examine each export licence application on a case-by-case basis against the Consolidated EU and National Arms Export Licensing Criteria.” “We will not issue any export licences where to do so would be inconsistent with these criteria.” More

The government is advising businesses to use CO2 monitoring equipment to check whether indoor spaces are sufficiently ventilated to stop the spread of Covid-19 in them.Ahead of a further reopening of the economy next week ministers want offices, shops, pubs, and restaurants to identify poorly-ventilated spaces as part of their risk assessments and take steps to fix them or close them off.In a change of emphasis, advice which previously stressed social distancing and masks, has been amended so that ventilation is now “the priority” for risk assessments.The new approach may impose extra costs of some businesses, some of whom have already spent significant sums Covid-proofing their premises in line with the old rules. But an evolving understanding of the way the virus spreads – predominantly through aerosol – has prompted a change in approach. “A CO2 monitor could help you assess whether a space is poorly ventilated. If you can’t improve ventilation in poorly ventilated spaces, minimise use of these spaces,” the government’s new advice, published on Wednesday, says.”People exhale carbon dioxide (CO2) when they breathe out. If there is a build-up of CO2 in an area it can indicate that ventilation needs improving.”Although CO2 levels are not a direct measure of possible exposure to COVID-19, checking levels using a monitor can help you identify poorly ventilated areas.”Advice for fixing a poorly-ventilated space includes opening windows, doors, and improving air ducts and mechanical ventilation. The use of any space found to have poor ventilation that cannot be fixed should be minimised, the guidelines warn – in a move that could see restaurant backrooms and snug bars closed off.The government says local councils and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) will enforce the new rules with nationwide checks, and that businesses could be prosecuted for “significant” breaches. TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said the new guidelines were “a recipe for chaos and rising infections”.“They have been published without proper consultation with unions or employers, just two full working days before restrictions end on Monday,” she said. “Instead of providing clear and consistent guidance on how to keep staff safe at work, the government is abandoning workers and employers.“As infection rates surge, every employer must by law carry out a thorough risk assessment and take action to keep their workers safe.“But these inadequate guidelines will leave many employers with more questions than answers and worried about their liability if they get things wrong.”On Monday Boris Johnson urged the country to adopt “extreme caution” as the final lockdown restrictions are lifted on 19 July.The Prime Minister called on companies to stagger their transition back to office work throughout the summer, but is removing the remaining legal restrictions on personal activity. More

The U.K. government announced Wednesday that it plans to introduce a statute of limitations for alleged crimes committed during decades of violence in Northern Ireland a move that would end prosecution for killings by both British soldiers and members of militant groups.Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis told lawmakers in the House of Commons that the statute would “apply equally to all Troubles-related incidents.” He said the change reflected the increasing difficulty of prosecuting people for long-ago crimes. More than 3,500 people died — most of them civilians — during three decades of violence known as the “Troubles,” a three-way conflict involving Irish republican and British loyalist paramilitaries and U.K. troops.“We know that the prospect of the end of criminal prosecutions will be difficult for some to accept, and this is not a position we take lightly,” Lewis said.“But we’ve come to the view that this is the best and only way to facilitate an effective information retrieval and provision process, and the best way to help Northern Ireland move further along the road to reconciliation,” he said. “It is, in reality, a painful recognition of the very reality of where we are.”The statute of limitations will accompanied by a new independent body tasked with uncovering and compiling information about Troubles-related deaths and injuries, according to Lewis.The 1998 Good Friday peace accord ended large-scale violence in Northern Ireland. As part of the peace process, many militants were released from prison or were not prosecuted for actions during the Troubles.The U.K.’s Conservative government is under pressure from many party members and the military to lift the threat of prosecution from troops who served in Northern Ireland decades ago. Several prosecutions of former soldiers for alleged Troubles crimes have recently collapsed. Earlier this month, authorities announced plans to halt the prosecution of two former British soldiers over the killing of three people in Northern Ireland in 1972, including two shot dead on “Bloody Sunday,” when paratroopers killed 13 Catholic civilians in the city of Londonderry British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the statute of limitations would stop army veterans facing “vexatious prosecutions well into their 70s and 80s.”He told lawmakers that the plan would “enable the province of Northern Ireland to draw a line under the Troubles, to enable the people of Northern Ireland to move forward.”Putting a time limit on prosecutions will also mean the perpetrators of some paramilitary attacks could escape justice. The opposition Labour Party called the statute of limitations “an amnesty in all but name” for murder.Jeffrey Donaldson, leader of Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party, said “victims will see these proposals as perpetrator-focused rather than victim-focused and an insult to both the memory of those innocent victims who lost their lives during our Troubles and their families.”“We understand that with the passage of time the prospect of justice is diminishing for many, but these proposals, if passed, will extinguish that flickering flame of justice completely and is a moral overreach that cannot be accepted,” Donaldson said. More

The UK government intends to introduce a statute of limitations which would end all prosecutions in Troubles-related cases, Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis confirmed.The cabinet minister promised a new independent body to help families find out what happened to loved ones in killings and other legacy cases involving ex-paramilitaries and former members of the security forces.“We know the prospect of the end of criminal prosecutions will be difficult for some to accept, and this is not a position we take lightly,” Mr Lewis told MPs on Wednesday.The cabinet minister added: “We’ve come to the view that this is … the best way to move Northern Ireland further along the road to reconciliation.”Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer condemned the government’s plan for a “blanket” amnesty for crimes committed during the Troubles era, claiming it was “plain wrong” to end prosecutions.“I’ve also prosecuted terrorists as the Director of Public Prosecutions, so I know how difficult and how sensitive this is. But a blanket amnesty, including for terrorists, is plain wrong,” Sir Keir said at PMQs.Labour accused the government of putting party political interests before the country. Shadow Northern Ireland secretary Louise Haigh it would be “foolish and unsustainable” to push legislation through without support from any political party in the province.Ms Haigh told the Commons: “Any proposal to deal with legacy must have victims and the communities of Northern Ireland at its heart.”She added: “Little wonder that many have greeted today’s proposals with deep scepticism and wonder if it is more an exercise in shoring up narrow party support than it is in delivering the reconciliation communities in Northern Ireland crave.”Promising to introduce legislation “by the end of this autumn”, Mr Lewis said it would include proposals for a new independent body to focus on the recovery of information about Troubles-related deaths.But the Northern Ireland secretary insisted criminal investigations had proved damaging. “It’s clear the current system for dealing with the legacy of the Troubles is not working,” Mr Lewis said.“It’s now a difficult, in fact painful, truth that the focus on criminal investigations is increasingly unlikely to deliver successful criminal justice outcomes, but all the while it continues to divide communities and it fails to obtain answers for a majority of victims and families.”DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson said the plan to introduce a statute of limitations for Troubles-related offences would be “rejected by everyone” in Northern Ireland.The DUP MP added: “There can be no equivalence between the soldier and police officer who served their country and those cowardly terrorists who hid behind masks and terrorised under the cover of darkness.“The Democratic Unionist Party, both publicly and privately, has, and continues to oppose, any form of amnesty … We will oppose any plans that give an effective amnesty to those who murdered and maimed over many decades.”Claiming the government wanted to see “truth and reconciliation” in Northern Ireland, Mr Lewis suggested that ending prosecutions would encourage more people to come forward with information.Republic of Ireland’s foreign minister Simon Coveney said Dublin would oppose any unilateral move to end all Troubles-era prosecutions.Mr Coveney said the UK government plan was not a “fait accompli” – promising he would push for “inclusive dialogue to try to agree consensus”. More

The government’s proposals for a “blanket” amnesty for crimes commited during the Troubles in Northern Ireland is “plain wrong”, Keir Starmer has said.The policy, which is opposed by all five of the main political parties in Northern Ireland and the Irish government, would end prosecutions for crimes commited before the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.The move is being driven by the government’s promise to end prosecutions for British soldiers accused of crimes during the Troubles, who would be covered by the new approach, alongside former paramilitaries.Speaking during prime minister’s questions, the Labour leader said: “I worked in Northern Ireland for six years with the policing board and the police. I’ve also prosecuted terrorists as the Director of Public Prosecutions, so I know how difficult and how sensitive this is. But a blanket amnesty, including for terrorists, is plain wrong.”But speaking in defence of the plans, Boris Johnson told the Commons that the idea should be given a “fair wind” – accusing Sir Keir of a lack of statesmanship.”The people of Northern Ireland must, if we possibly can allow them to, move forwards now,” the prime minister told MPs.”[Keir Starmer] will know that the proposals that have been brought forward… are measured, they are balanced and they have a wide degree of support from former Labour prime ministers and former Labour leaders who have considerable more distinction, if I may say, than him.”He will recall that it was under that Labour administration that many terrorists were unfortunately given effectively an amnesty, and they were allowed to escape the full consequences of their crimes and that is the reality.”The sad fact remains that there are many members of the armed services who continue to face the threat of vexatious prosecutions well into their 70s, 80s and later, and we’re finally bringing forward a solution to this problem, to enable the province of Northern Ireland to draw a line under the Troubles, to enable the people of Northern Ireland to move forward.”I think someone with greater statesmanship and clarity of vision would have seen that and given these proposals a fair wind.”Last week Sir Keir said Labour would not remain neutral in a border poll on the status of Northern Ireland and actively campaign for it to stay as part of the UK. More