Markus Andrews

Boris Johnson has refused to apologise for his failure to condemn the booing of England footballers, as Keir Starmer accused him of “trying to stoke a culture war”.In a stormy session of prime minister’s questions in the House of Commons, the Labour leader pointed to comments ahead of the Euro 2020 tournament in home secretary Priti Patel said that it was for fans to decide whether they booed players who took the knee in protest and racism and Mr Johnson failed to condemn those who do.After both the prime minister and Ms Patel belatedly voiced outrage following racist abuse directed at England penalty-takers Marcus Rashford, Jadon Sancho and Buyako Saka, Starmer said it was clear that “the government has been trying to stoke a culture war and they have realised that they are on the wrong side”.And the Labour leader told MPs: “Far from giving racism the red card, the prime minister gave it the green light.”Mr Johnson announced new plans to ban those responsible for online racism from attending football matches and said he had warned social media companies on Tuesday of hefty fines for hosting racist comments which they will face under the government’s Online Harms Bill.But he refused Starmer’s demand to express regret for his government’s approach to “taking the knee”, telling MPs: “I utterly condemn and abhor the racist outpourings that we saw on Sunday night.”Mr Johnson also refused to apologise for earlier comments he made as a journalist, in which he described black Africans as “piccanninies with watermelon smiles”, telling SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford that the words had been taken out of context.Senior Tory backbencher Steve Baker today warned the party needs urgently to rethink its approach to taking the knee, after England squad member Tyrone Mings accused Ms Patel of “stoking the fire” of racism by treating it as gesture politics.And Sir Keir told the Commons today: “We can all see what’s happened here. The government has been trying to stoke a culture war and they’ve realised they’re on the wrong side and now they are hoping that nobody has noticed.“Why else would a Conservative MP boast that he’s not watching his own team? Why else would another Conservative MP say that Marcus Rashford spends too much time playing politics, when he’s actually trying to feed the children that the government won’t? And why does the prime minister refuse time and time again – even now – to condemn those who are boo our players for standing up against racism?“What is it that this England team symbolises that this Conservative Party is so afraid of?”Starmer’s comments were interrupted at one point by a Tory MP shouting that Mings was a Labour member.Mr Johnson denied that he was trying to engage in “culture wars” on issues like racism.He insisted that the whole of the Commons was “united” in admiration for the England team, adding: “We stick up for them and what we’re doing is taking practical steps to fight racism – changing the football banning regime, fining the online companies, and we will use more legislation if we have to – just as we used the threat of legislation to stop the European Super League.“I don’t want to engage in a political culture war of any kind, I want to get on with delivering for the people of this country.”Mr Johnson insisted that the government had “made it absolutely clear that no-one should boo the England team”.But Starmer produced newspaper reports showing that on 7 June the PM’s spokesperson said that ‘On taking the knee specifically, the prime minister is more focused on actions rather than gestures’ and that on 14 June Ms Patel described the practice as “gesture politics”.“There’s no point pretending that these things weren’t said,” said the Labour leader.And he added: “The England footballer Tyrone Mings… he said this labelling anti-racism messages as gesture politics served to stoke the fire of racism and hatred – Prime Minister they’re powerful words from someone who has himself been subjected to racist abuse. He’s right, isn’t he?”The “worst kind of gesture politics” was the PM wearing a Three Lions jersey over his work shirt at the Euro 2020 final but being unwilling to condemn those who booed the England team, said Starmer.Boris Johnson replied: “I want to reiterate my support, our support, our total support for our fantastic team and I support them in the way that they show solidarity with their friends who face racism.” More

Racist abuse of footballers online will trigger a ban on attending matches, Boris Johnson has announced – closing a legal loophole.“You will not be going to the match – no ifs, no buts,” the prime minister told abusive supporters, in the Commons, after pressure from Labour to adopt the move.The commitment came as Mr Johnson defended Priti Patel, his home secretary, for defending fans’ right to boo England players taking the knee at the start of matches.But Keir Starmer told him: “She’s got this wrong, the whole county knows that, his own MPs know it.”In fierce clashes over criticism of government ministers for allegedly “stoking racism”, Mr Johnson insisted: “I don’t want to engage in a political culture war of any kind.”Currently, football banning orders do not cover offences that take place online – covering racism shouted from the terraces only – sparking pressure to beef up the Online Safety Bill.Mr Johnson also repeated that the Bill would hit tech companies failing to remove illegal and harmful content from their platforms swiftly with fines worth up to 10 per cent of their annual global turnover.But the legislation has been long delayed and it is unclear when it will finally come into force.The announcement will be seen as a reaction to a troubled week in which his party’s stance on racism has come under fire from both England stars and within his own party.Tyrone Mings accused Ms Patel of “stoking the fire” of racism with her attack on taking the knee as “gesture politics”, one former Tory minister saying he is “completely right”.Sir Keir highlighted the prime minister’s own initial refusal to condemn booing fans, warning: “There’s no point pretending that these things weren’t said.“The England footballer Tyrone Mings, he said this labelling anti-racism messages as gesture politics served to stoke the fire of racism and hatred.“Prime minister, they’re powerful words from someone who has himself been subjected to racist abuse. He’s right, isn’t he?”But Mr Johnson replied, of the England team: “I support them in the way that they show solidarity with their friends who face racism.“The home secretary has faced racism and prejudice all her career of a kind that he can never imagine, and she has taken practical steps to get black and minority officers into the police in record numbers.” More

A Labour frontbencher has shared her frustration that no black MPs were initially selected to take part in a Commons debate on the scourge of racist abuse on social media.Home Office minister Victoria Prentis faced questions about what the government is doing to ensure stronger action is taken against online racists.Marsha de Cordova, the shadow secretary for women and equalities, said on Twitter that was “very disappointed” not to be selected to speak at Wednesday’s debate on racist online abuse.The Labour MP added: “The draw is random, but it doesn’t seem right that there is not a single Black MP on the call list for this debate.” Following her tweet, Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle “used his discretion” to add two black to the list of MPs selected to take part, the Labour frontbencher revealed.“I am pleased to see that Mr Speaker has used his discretion to rectify the situation and add two Black colleagues to the call list this afternoon. It is essential that Black voices are heard on this issue,” Ms de Cordova later tweeted.The emergency debate took place after Labour tabled an urgent question in the Commons.Labour’s shadow home secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds challenged the government over proposals in its Online Harms Bill – arguing current plans “would not stop” racist abuse on social media.Responding for the government, Ms Prentis claimed home secretary Priti Patel had been “relentless in pursuing social media companies to ensure they take much tougher stances”.Boris Johnson said earlier that anyone convicted of racist abuse online will be banned from attending matches. “You will not be going to the match – no ifs, no buts,” the prime minister told abusive supporters.It comes as influential Conservative MP Steve Baker urged his Tory colleagues to urgently “challenge” their attitude towards taking the knee, as he forwarded them a letter from the Conservatives Against Racism For Equality (CARFE). More

Boris Johnson’s government will confront Malta over reports it refused to accept UK travellers vaccinated with an India-made batch of the AstraZeneca vaccine, the transport secretary has said.Grant Shapps said the UK government would make clear that the vaccine made by the Serum Institute of India is “absolutely the same product” as batches made elsewhere.He made the comments in response to reports in the Daily Telegraph that a couple from Hull – Steve and Glenda Hardy – were barred from a flight from Manchester to Malta because they had had the Indian-made jab.The Covishield batch of the AstraZeneca jab made by the Serum Institute has not been authorised by the EU’s regulator – but has been approved by the UK’s regulator.Mr Shapps said the government would take the “misunderstanding” up with Maltese authorities and make the case for India-made batch in the “strongest possible terms”.He told BBC Breakfast: “The [UK] medicines agency, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, have been very clear that it doesn’t matter whether the AstraZeneca you have is made here or the Serum Institute in India.”He added: “It is absolutely the same product, it provides exactly the same levels of protection … We will certainly speak to our Maltese colleagues to point all this out.”“Obviously it is up to them what they do. But we will be making the scientific point in the strongest possible terms there is no difference, we don’t recognise any difference.”Mr Shapps told LBC: “We will be speaking to our friends and colleagues in Malta today to try to clear up what I believe may just be a straightforward misunderstanding.”The prime minister has previously stated he was “very confident” that Covishield jabs would not cause an issue, following estimates that five million Britons could be barred from taking holidays in the EU.The transport secretary also warned some countries on the green list for travel could be bumped back to the amber list due to rising case numbers.It follows reports the Spanish Balearic islands, including tourist hotspots Ibiza, Mallorca and Menorca, could return to amber just a fortnight after they were cleared for quarantine free-travel.“We review these every three weeks,” Mr Shapps said. “I hope we have made very clear to everybody when booking trips at the moment there is always the chance that countries will move around.”Those travelling to amber listed countries, such as mainland Spain, have to self-isolate for 10 days on their return to England. However, as of 19 July the requirement to quarantine will be scrapped for the fully vaccinated and those aged under 18.The government’s travel lists are expected to be updated later on Wednesday or on Thursday. More

Conservative MPs who hyped the potential benefits of Brexit for the fishing industry have been accused of quietly abandoning any mention of the issue after promised gains failed to materialise.The National Federation of Fisherman’s Organisations (NFFO) said on Wednesday that even the “most vociferous supporters” in the Tory parliamentary party had gone “very quiet” since the signing of Boris Johnson’s deal.It comes after fishing representative bodies accused the prime minister of a “betrayal” and for weaving a “tale of woe, very far away from the sea of opportunity that some spoke about”.”Those Conservative MPs that were our most vociferous supporters were very quiet, about the implications of the TCA [trade and cooperation agreement]. That’s the world that we’re having to adjust to,” said Barrie Deas, chief executive of the NFFO in a briefing with journalists on Wednesday.”The European Research Group, for example quite often referred to fishing as a poster child [for Brexit] but I don’t think any of them came out and said this is a bad deal for fishing. Their eye was on the main prize, which of course was the trade agreement.”Mr Deas reiterated the widely held industry position the agreement signed with the EU had been a “sell-out”, keeping the situation more or less unchanged until at least 2026. And he said Brussels was “quietly confident” that it could use future negotiations to prolong the status quo indefinitely.”It’s really quite hard to convey how sudden the industry’s fall from grace was. In December last year we were the kind of the poster child for Brexit, and we were very much looking forward to a future as an independent coastal state, with very, very solid assurances given by the Prime Minister, Lord Frost, and senior members of the of the cabinet over control over who fishes in UK waters and escape from the Common Fisheries Policy – and quota shares that reflected our new status as an independent coastal state,” he said. “And then, from Christmas Eve, really, the government in an eerie echo of Ted Heath’s betrayal – as it’s seen in the industry – in 1973 where fishing was sacrificed, despite all the assurances and promises. That deal was made in order to secure the broader advantages that would be attached to a trade deal with the EU.”The chief executive said fishermen had been dealt a triple blow by Brexit, the expansion of offshore wind turbines, and what he referred to as a government “in thrall” to the “conservation lobby”. He argued that fishing politics would be “toxic” for years to come.And Mr Deas argued that the weak deal struck with the EU had been interpreted by other countries as a sign that the UK would not stand up for fishermen – an approach they were increasingly taking advantage of.”The turbulence that has been created has extended to our relations with Norway,” he said, describing the country’s policy as a “quota grab”.”Seeing that the UK gave into the EU, Norway is playing quite a dangerous game of hardball on Mackerel – at some cost, it has to be said, to their reputation.”Boris Johnson almost completely folded on fishing during Brexit talks, ditching many UK red lines that had been in place since the start of talks in order to avoid a no-deal.Quota shares were only moderately adjusted to favour UK vessels, and no coastal exclusion zone was established, despite promises to the industry. The limited nature of the trade agreement between the UK and EU compared to membership of the single market and customs union has also had a devastating impact on some British fish exporters, especially those of shellfish. More

Grant Shapps has backed the decision by London’s mayor to keep face coverings mandatory on public transport — despite Boris Johnson insisting just last week people would have the choice whether to wear them.As the government prepares to drop the legal requirement to use face coverings from 19 July, the transport secretary Sadiq Khan’s decision was in line with what the government had “wanted” and “expected”.Ordering Transport for London (TfL) to retain the requirement, Mr Khan said on Wednesday he was “not prepared” to put tube, tram and other transport users in the capital “at risk” by removing the rules on Monday.In Scotland, first minister Nicola Sturgeon also announced she would keep in place the instruction to wear a face masks in shops, on transport and other enclosed spaces “in all likelihood for some Time to come”.Pressed on whether the government disagreed with the action, Mr Shapps told Sky News: “No — whilst we are going from legal requirements to guidelines, we do expect individual carriers, the transport organisations, to make sure that they are putting in place whatever is appropriate for their network.”“The airlines have already said that you will need to carry on wearing masks on those,” he added. “It is very much in line with what we expected – indeed wanted – to happen.“On the other hand if you’re on a long distance train, you’re the only person in the carriage, it’s late in the evening or something, there’s clearly no real point in wearing a mask, we don’t want to say you’re breaking the law by not wearing a mask in a situation where’s the absolutely no advantage of wearing a mask“This is very much what we expect, anticipate and said should and would happen”.Speaking just last week the prime minister said people “might choose” to wear a facing covering in places such as crowded public transport, but the government toughened its stance at the weekend with new guidance saying it “expected” the public to use face masks in enclosed public spaces.Mr Khan has also asked TfL to put measures in place to help ensure the continued use of masks in taxis and private hire vehicles by both drivers and passengers unless they are exempt.“I’ve repeatedly made clear that the simplest and safest option would have been for the Government to retain the national requirement for face coverings on public transport,” Mr Khan said.“I’m not prepared to stand by and put Londoners, and our city’s recovery, at risk.“This is why, after careful consideration, I have decided to ask TfL to retain the requirement for passengers to wear a face covering on all TfL services when the national regulations change.“By keeping face masks mandatory we will give Londoners and visitors the reassurance and confidence to make the most of what our city has to offer, while also protecting our heroic transport workers and those who may be vulnerable and rely on the network to get around our city.“It’s an extra layer of protection on top of TfL’s world-leading enhanced cleaning regime – and I’m sure Londoners will continue to do the right thing as they have done throughout the pandemic, and continue to wear a face covering on TfL services.” More

A union representing civil servants plans to “name and shame” any MPs who refuse to wear face coverings in parliament once legal requirements are dropped next week.FDA general secretary Dave Penman said he would write to all MPs warning them that his union was willing to “call out” those ditching their masks, even after Covid restrictions are lifted on July 19.It comes as leader of the Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg said he would no longer wear his mask around the parliamentary estate from Monday – suggesting many MPs had already ditched their face coverings.“This morning I wandered around the palace of Westminster wearing a mask, and met almost nobody in those circumstances. I will not be wearing a mask – what would be the point?,” the Tory MP told the ConservativeHome podcast.“If you’re had both vaccines, your risk of transmitting the disease is slight. So in a way you’ve done your societal bit by having the vaccine, as much as by wearing a mask, which is why I think it’s sensibly individual choice.”House of Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has written to MPs explaining that they will be “encouraged” to continue wearing the coverings until parliament breaks for its summer recess on 22 July.But the politicians cannot be forced to continue using them while in the chamber or elsewhere – even though other staff on the Westminster estate must continue to be required to wear masks while moving around the premises after 19 July. Mr Penman said it was “extraordinary” that authorities in parliament could not force MPs to wear face coverings while staff had to keep wearing face coverings.“In these circumstances, MPs who fail to wear masks in the House and are not exempt are doing so in the full knowledge that their actions potentially increase the risk of Covid-19 infection to their parliamentary colleagues and House staff,” said the union chief.“Such action needs to be called out and, as such, we will write to those MPs making clear that their actions are undermining the health of the dedicated public servants who support them and making public the names of those MPs who undertake this reckless action.”The FDA has also criticised the plan to allow the Commons chamber to return to full capacity for PMQs on 21 July, describing it as a “political stunt which shows scant regard for the wellbeing of parliamentary staff”.The Prospect union, which also represents civil servants, has also written to MPs urging them to continue wearing a mask around the parliamentary estate. The organisation said it would be “an example to the public and a simple step to protect those you work alongside every day”.Earlier on Wednesday, London mayor Sadiq Khan said he had Transport for London (TfL) to enforce mandatory mask wearing on the system, even after legal restrictions have been lifted on 19 July.Transport secretary Grant Shapps said the decision was in line with what the government had “wanted” and “expected”.The cabinet minister said: “Whilst we are going from legal requirements to guidelines, we do expect individual carriers, the transport organisations, to make sure that they are putting in place whatever is appropriate for their network.” More

The government is expected to announce an effective amnesty for those who committed crimes during the Troubles in Northern Ireland in a bid to deal with the region’s bloody past.A statute of limitations ending all prosecutions related to the Troubles before 1998 is said to be one of the elements of a plan to be unveiled by Brandon Lewis on Wednesday afternoon.The move has been condemned by victims groups and political opponents, who warn that the “obscene” legislation which the government hopes will be voted on in the autumn would give a green light to future terrorist groups.A government source said the package of measures “will support Northern Ireland to move beyond an adversarial cycle that doesn’t deliver information or reconciliation for victims and survivors nor end the cycle of investigations against our veterans” but rejected claims it would effectively amount to an amnesty.The blanket approach was necessary since lawyers advising the secretary of state have warned that protecting one side from prosecution could be illegal and that clemency should be extended to those on both sides of the fighting, The Sun reported.More than 3,500 people died during the conflict, which stretched from the early 1970s to the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement in 1998, while tens of thousands more were left injured.Julie Hambleton, whose older sister Maxine was among 21 people killed in the 1974 blasts in Birmingham, has written to Boris Johnson on behalf of the Justice 4 The 21 campaign group to decry the planned legislation.“If one of your loved ones was blown up beyond recognition, where you were only able to identify your son or daughter by their fingernails because their face had been burned so severely from the blast and little of their remains were left intact, would you be so quick to agree to such obscene legislation being implemented?” Ms Hambleton asked.“You would do everything in your power to find the murderers and bring them to justice, which is exactly what we campaign for every day.”She added: “How is this considered to be a deterrent for any future terrorist organisations?”What your government is proposing is that no matter what city terrorists decide to wreak death and destruction upon, do not worry because the British government will let you walk away free without any fear of retribution of prosecution.“Earlier this month, Northern Ireland’s Public Prosecution Service (PPS) announced their intention to withdraw proceedings against two former soldiers – Soldier F for the murder of two men during Bloody Sunday in 1972 and Soldier B for the murder of 15-year-old Daniel Hegarty six months later.It followed a review of the cases by the PPS in light of a recent court ruling that caused the collapse of another Troubles murder trial involving two military veterans.The Crown cases against Soldier F and Soldier B hinged on evidence of a similar nature to that ruled inadmissible in April’s trial of Soldier A and Soldier C for the 1972 murder of Official IRA leader Joe McCann in Belfast.A legal challenge to the decision to withdraw proceedings against Soldier F is ongoing.In 2014, the Stormont House Agreement proposed a Historical Investigations Unit to examine unsolved murders during the Troubles and an Independent Commission on Information Retrieval for families to learn more about the fate of their loved ones.None of the proposals were implemented.Additional reporting by PA More