Markus Andrews

Tribal as people tend to be, the display, or not, of flags, banners and emblems tends to be a contentious affair, even in the most liberal of democracies and usually tolerant of populations. Even in states where the burning or other desecration of the flag is illegal, such as France, disrespect is sometimes shown as a gesture of political dissent or defiance. As with statues and historical monuments, flags have the power, often as not, to divide as well as to unite communities. When political parties attempt to appropriate a flag to themselves, the reaction among others can be especially severe.Such is the case with the sudden popularity of the union flag among British ministers and other Conservative politicians. In the past, the Tories, the party of empire, were happier than most to drape a union flag over a trestle table at a public meeting or decorate a manifesto with a few, to remind the voters of their opponents supposed and implied lack of patriotism. But it was a trick sparingly used, even by the likes of Margaret Thatcher, who once semi-jokingly draped a hanky over a model of a British Airways plane featuring one of its then new international ethnic designs, rather than the traditional red, white and blue. No longer. Cabinet ministers now seem to compete as to who can manage to jam the most and the biggest union flags into a Zoom call. When the communities secretary, Robert Jenrick, was gently teased about his union jack “rating” when he appeared on BBC Breakfast, the presenters, Naga Munchetty and Charlie Stayt, were publicly reprimanded by BBC management. A Tory backbencher even asked the BBC why it didn’t have more union flags in its annual review.Read more: More

European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has taken a swipe at the UK over “transparency” on vaccine exports, casting fresh doubt on hopes for a resolution to the ongoing dispute between London and Brussels over jabs.Europe’s top official said she had not seen any evidence that any British-made vaccines had been exported, despite EU-made doses going to into the UK.The tone was in start contrast to an earlier joint statement that said Britain and the EU were hoping for a “win-win” to end tensions.Speaking after an oline summit of EU leaders, Ms Von der Leyen said saying AstraZeneca “has to catch up, has to honour the contract it has with the European member states, before it can engage again in exporting vaccines.”She added: “We have worldwide supply chains that have to be intact and it is of the utmost importance that we get back to an attitude of openness.”Read more:Asked about how many vaccines the UK had exported, she told reporters: “I have no knowledge so far of UK exports, perhaps I am mistaken and waiting for their transparency.”So far some 31 million doses of vaccine have been administered in the UK to more than half of the adult population, compared to the more than 60 million jabs given across EU countries containing a total population of 446 million.As a result, the bloc has enacted a policy allowing member states to block shipments of jabs due for export in the event the immunisations are needed within the European Union.Tensions have persisted between the bloc and the UK throughout their respective vaccine rollouts. The UK maintains that it did a better job of securing cast iron vaccine contracts quickly, while the EU side believes Britain should share more with the continent.Read more:Meanwhile, Angela Merkel told the summit the EU was hoping for”a win-win situation … that is, we want to act in a politically sensible way.”Limiting trade in vaccines has proven to be an ideological sticking point in Europe, with some officials believing it serves a necessary purpose while others claim it undermines the bloc’s reputation as a free trading union.Seeking to counter accusations of “vaccine nationalism”, Ms Von der Leyen presented slides showing that 77 million vaccine doses had been shipped from EU plants to over 40 countries since the start of December.Belgian prime minister Alexander de Croo said that he believed the dispute “can be resolved” as he referred to a phone call with Mr Johnson last week.“We think that the discussion we have with the United Kingdom can be resolved based on good agreements,” Mr de Croo told a Brussels press conference.Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte echoed that, saying he was “cautiously optimistic.”“I think that on Saturday or soon after, they could come to an agreement which would be very helpful because we are friends, the UK and the rest of Europe, and we need each other,” he told reporters.Additional reporting by Reuters More

At least 10 EU countries will no longer extradite their nationals to face prosecution in the UK because of Brexit, the government has admitted.In correspondence with the House of Lords EU Committee, it said Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and Sweden will be “invoking constitutional rules as reason not to extradite their own nationals to the UK”. A letter from the Home Office said it amounted to “an absolute bar on the extradition of own nationals” to the UK.Additionally, Austria and the Czech Republic will only extradite their own nationals to Britain with their consent. It means that British authorities may have to attempt prosecutions in other countries, or circulate wanted criminals on an Interpol database in the hope they leave their home nation and can be caught elsewhere.The UK was previously part of the European Arrest Warrant system, which allows a streamlined extradition process between EU states and has been used for high-profile terrorists, drug smugglers and murderers.Read more:As part of its post-Brexit security agreement, the UK has drawn up new extradition processes, but they do not have the same power to bypass constitutional barriers.EU states can also refuse to surrender suspected criminals if the alleged offence does not exist in their country, or it is a “political” crime.Richard Martin, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) lead on Brexit planning, previously told the Home Affairs Committee that a new national extradition unit was formed in December.He said that where countries refuse to extradite suspects, police have two choices: “One is we work with the Crown Prosecution Service and decide whether it is in the public interest to try and prosecute these individuals in their home countries. “The second is we circulate them anyway on Interpol because as soon as they enter another country they’re fair game, so we can arrest them in that country and bring them back.”A report published by the Lords EU Committee on Friday said the new extradition arrangements were “untested” and that their “operational effectiveness” should be scrutinised.Dominic Raab Admits Security Tools At Risk After Brexit After Theresa May Raises ConcernsPeers also raised concern over the capability of the EU to terminate security cooperation over data protection rules and human rights.Committee chair Lord Ricketts, a former national security adviser, said that although the agreement had avoided a feared “cliff-edge” for law enforcement, there were “still grounds for considerable caution”. “These are a complex and untested set of arrangements and their effectiveness will depend crucially on how they are implemented at the operational level,” he added. “The provisions on data protection are particularly fragile. If the UK does not remain in step with changes to EU data protection laws, or if the UK is found to have breached fundamental rights when handling personal data, then this could trigger the suspension, or even termination, of all the justice and security cooperation.”The report said that the EU will continue to monitor UK data protection rules, and hold it to “higher standards” as a country outside the EU. Peers warned that the situation increases the scope for legal challenges, which could trigger a suspension of the security agreement.The document states that it can be terminated by either the UK or EU with nine months’ notice, for reasons including derogation from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).It is enshrined in British law through the Human Rights Act – but that is currently under review.The law enforcement part of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement allows the continued sharing of policing and criminal justice data, including on DNA, fingerprints, air passenger information and criminal records.But the UK lost access to the EU Schengen Information System (SIS II) database, which was previously integrated with the Police National Computer and searched more than 600 million times a year.The Lords EU Committee report called the change the “most significant gap in terms of lost capability”, adding: “It means that, for the time being, law enforcement officers can no longer immediately have access to real-time data about persons and objects of interest, including wanted and missing persons. “The fallback system, the Interpol I-24/7 database, currently provides data in a matter of hours, not seconds.”Peers said that its success “depends heavily” on EU states accepting the additional workload of ‘double-keying’ data into both the SIS II and Interpol systems. “We did not receive any clear evidence from the government on how it planned to secure such commitments from EU member states to do so,” the report said.“We therefore remain concerned about the effect of the loss of access to SIS II on the operational effectiveness of UK police and law enforcement agencies.” More

A Tory MP has vowed to protest against coronavirus lockdown restrictions by carrying around a pint of milk, which he said would be of “symbolic importance” to him.Sir Charles Walker, MP for Broxbourne, was one of 35 Conservative backbenchers who rebelled against the extension of coronavirus laws for a further six months.The defeat came after Boris Johnson had ordered his MPs to support the extension, but dozens opted to vote against it on Thursday.Prior to the vote, Sir Walker made a bizarre pledge to “protest about the price of milk” and told the Commons he would spend the next few days walking around London “with a pint of milk on my person because that pint will represent my protest”.He said: “As sure as eggs are eggs, we will be back here in six months at the end of September being asked to renew this legislation again. It is inevitable and anyone who thinks it’s not inevitable is deluding themselves.“But this afternoon, I’m not here to talk about eggs, I want to talk about milk because in the remaining days of this lockdown, I am going to allow myself an act of defiance, my own protest that others may join me in. I am going to protest about the price of milk.Read more:“Now I’m not sure whether I think the price is too high or the price is too low, I shall come to that decision later. But for the next few days I am going to walk around London with a pint of milk on my person because that pint will represent my protest.Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayInside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekday“And there may be others who will choose too to walk around London with a pint of milk on their person as well and perhaps as we walk past each other on the street our eyes might meet, we might even stop for a chat, but I was thinking to myself and I will continue to think for myself, what will their pint of milk represent, what will their protest be?“Perhaps they will be protesting the roaring back of a mental health demon brought on by lockdown, perhaps they’ll be protesting a renewed battle with anorexia, with depression, with anxiety, with addiction. Perhaps with their pint of milk they will be protesting the lack of agency in their life, not being able to make a meaningful decision.“Maybe a loss of career, or job, or business, maybe they will be protesting this country’s slide into authoritarianism or perhaps they’ll be protesting the fact that we allow unelected officials to have lecterns at Number 10 to lecture us how to live our lives.”He continued his speech in this vein, adding that the pint “shall remind me that the act of protest is a freedom, a freedom, not a right and unless you cherish freedoms every day, unless you fight for freedoms every day, they end up being taken away from you”.Following his speech, Sir Walker appeared for an interview with Channel 4 News holding a pint of milk and told presenter Cathy Newman he had “projected a symbolism” on the pint because protests were “virtually made illegal for the past year”.It comes as the health secretary Matt Hancock failed to guarantee that the powers to implement lockdown restrictions, described by Tory MPs as “draconian”, would be scrapped by October.Mr Hancock said he “cannot answer” whether the government will be “retiring” the emergency measures within the Coronavirus Act 2020 in October or whether it will be rolled on.He told the Commons: “There are parts of this Act that have allowed us to do good things that everybody would like to see like that, and so when we do come to retire this Act, which we must within one year and preferably within six months, we will need to make sure that we can continue to do that sort of thing and make sure that nurses can be enrolled as easily as possible into the NHS.“But I cannot answer whether we will be retiring it in six months. My preference would be yes, but given the last year, I think a prediction would be hasty.” More

A Westminster committee has drawn comparisons with the now-infamous Handforth Parish Council Zoom meeting, after several terse outburst from MPs threatened to plunge a hearing on post-Brexit fish and meat exports into farce.While the first 49 or so minutes of Thursday’s hearing of the Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs select committee passed innocuously enough, trouble was evidently brewing in the digital corridors of power.It all came to a head as Labour’s Barry Gardiner pressed environment secretary George Eustice over the UK’s apparent blindness with regards to the amount of fish that EU boats are still catching in British waters, following a report in Fishing Daily reported that – after the near collapse of a Brexit deal over fishing quotas – not a single European vessel was inspected at sea in January or February.Mr Gardiner’s insistent questioning and somewhat measured delivery – apparently aided by extensive on-screen notes –appears to have pushed committee chair Neil Parish beyond the brink.Bursting forth with pent-up frustration, Mr Parish exclaimed: “Barry, for goodness’ sake, we are are hour into this.”Read more:“Your questions are too long, Barry,” Mr Parish continued to shout, eventually interrupting an indignant Mr Gardiner’s protestations to bellow: “Well let him answer the question, Barry.”Gesticulating heavily, Mr Parish, added: “For goodness’ sake please, it’s going on too long, your question. Get to the end of the question.”Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayInside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayYet a defiant Mr Gardiner sought to hammer home the importance of his questions, saying: “Three months on, we still have no realtime knowledge of what 1,500 EU boats are catching, do we? And that includes the super trawlers that…”But he was again interrupted – this time by Tory MP Sheryll Murray, who interjected to question “on a point of order” whether Mr Gardiner’s point was related to the EU, or was in fact a “fisheries management” issue.A distinctly glum-looking Mr Gardiner responded curtly to affirm that the monitoring of EU fishing catches was indeed an issue related to the EU.At this point, after arguably prompting the furore with his initial outburst, Mr Parish – who was later gifted the additional surname of “Council” by The Independent’s deputy political editor on Twitter – said: “Right, let’s not have an argument”, calling on Mr Eustice to “give an answer to Barry, please, and then we must move on”.A possibly relieved Mr Eustice prefaced his somewhat vague response with the phrase, “in the interest of time” – going on to insist that he had not laid eyes upon a press release by his own department stating that at-sea inspectors had boarded 41 EU vessels last month, which Mr Gardiner alleged was published “in the last hour … no doubt because [Mr Eustice] correctly anticipated a question following the Fishing Daily report”.Seeking to move beyond the fracas, Mr Parish then even went to far as to side with Mr Gardiner in demanding that the secretary of state should provide the committee with a written explanation “of what’s happening, how we are going to board the boats, [and] how we are going to check the data” – following his department’s last-minute revelation that just 41 EU boats were inspected last month.But the committee chair could not resist rolling his eyes skywards as he granted Mr Gardiner “one last question, please”.The exchange – somewhat less staid than those typically observed during parliamentary committee hearings – drew hilarity on social media, after a clip was posted to Twitter by The Daily Telegraph’s Whitehall editor Harry Yorke.“This may be one of the funniest things I’ve ever watched at a Parliamentary select committee,” he wrote. “Barry Gardiner and Neil Parish go full Handforth Parish council over [fish]”.Other social media users wasted no time in drawing similar comparisons to the furious and eternally quotable parish council meeting that set the internet abuzz in February, encapsulating for many the awkwardness thrown up by the lags and pauses of current videoconferencing technology, not to mention shining a spotlight on the eccentric, combative – and all-too-often unseen – world of local democracy.“He has no authority here,” one Twitter user quipped, while another clearly felt the committee needed its very own acting clerk, writing: “Where is Jackie Weaver when you need her?” More

In the spring of 1975, three Downing Street officials wandered across the main square in Bonn, mulling over a plan to murder the British prime minister’s closest friend and confidante, Marcia Williams. Harold Wilson’s formidable and controversial secretary had helped him dominate British politics for 20 years. To the consternation of his critics, Wilson had ennobled her as Baroness Falkender the previous year but now the distinguished trio saw her as a toxic liability who threatened to destroy his health, premiership and legacy. Ever since Wilson’s recently hushed up heart scare, his personal physician and concerned friend Joseph Stone, had become obsessed by a disturbing notion: murdering Marcia might just be “in the national interest”. Dr Stone was flanked by Joe Haines, Wilson’s bruiser of a press secretary, and Bernard Donoughue, the head of the Downing Street policy unit. When Stone had first sounded them out by suggesting “it may be desirable to dispose of her. We’ve got to get this woman off his back,” and, “Perhaps, we should put her down,” he had been deadly serious. In Bonn, Stone again outlined how he could safely dispense with Marcia without arousing suspicion. As Lady Falkender’s doctor, he proposed to slip her a lethal quantity of her prescribed tranquilliser and then write up the death certificate as an accidental overdose. In Dr Stone, the trio may have had the means and opportunity of ridding Wilson of this “bothersome” woman, but it’s only by tracing the couple’s emotional co-dependency back over two decades that you can begin to understand the motive. More

Draconian lockdown laws imposed one year ago have been extended for a further six months, despite a major Tory revolt.The Coronavirus Act – granting powers over everything from school closures and public gatherings to the detention of infected people – was renewed by MPs, by 484 votes to 76.Conservative anger centred on the decision to renew the crackdown until October – three months beyond the promised lifting of restrictions in June, as set out under Boris Johnson’s timetable.Mark Harper, a leading Tory rebel, said June was “the roadmap’s supposed end”, warning: “A further renewal in October until March 2022 wasn’t ruled out by the government.”Earlier, new regulations to authorise restrictions during the easing of the lockdown in the weeks to come were approved without a vote.Read more:Lockdown roadmap dates: Which rules change on 29 March?Bill Gates predicts world will be ‘completely back to normal’ by 2022Controversy over new AstraZeneca trial data raises more unwanted vaccine questions‘No jab no pint’ plan would only come in when ‘absolutely everybody’ offered vaccine, Johnson saysLockdown roadmap dates: Which rules change on 29 March?The result was not in doubt once Labour confirmed it would continue to support the sweeping laws, despite raising doubts over whether the ban on protests is being lifted as promised. Thirty-five Conservative MPs rebelled, joining 21 Labour MPs, the 10 Liberal Democrats, the 7 Democratic Unionists and the Green Party’s Caroline Lucas. The SNP did not vote.Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayInside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayThe Act, which was imposed at the start of pandemic and requires fresh backing from MPs every six months, also grants powers over food supplies, as well as changes to sick pay.During the debate, the health secretary Matt Hancock  refused to rule out a further extension in the autumn, pointing to the threat from new Covid-19 variants emerging. A string of Tory MPs spoke out, including Sir Graham Brady, who urged MPs to “trust the British people and return their rights to them”.The chair of the 1922 Committee of backbench Conservatives warned: “The danger is the government starts to believe that these fundamental civil liberties belong to ministers to grant to us or withhold.”He said: “Does the government have the right to tell people whether they can see their children or their grandchildren, whether they can start a relationship with someone? My answer is an emphatic no.” Desmond Swayne, another former minister, warned of “total social control”, pointing to Mr Johnson’s hint that “you will have to provide your vaccination bona fides when you go to the pub”.And Charles Walker, vice chair of the 1922 Committee, revealed a bizarre protest plan, which would involve walking around London with a pint of milk.In future, he would be sitting with his family and would “spot that pint of milk on the table”, he told MPs.“And that pint shall remind me that the act of protest is a freedom, a freedom not a right, and unless you cherish freedoms every day – unless you fight for freedoms every day – they end up being taken away from you,” Mr Walker said.The Lib Dems voted against giving the government what they called a “blank cheque” – arguing that many of the powers granted had never been used.And Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader currently suspended from the party, said he would join about 20 leftwingers opposing the extension. More

The Treasury’s official communications budget jumped by more than a quarter last year as Rishi Sunak launched a major personal branding and publicity campaign drawing on the finance ministry’s resources.The budget for the Treasury’s communications team was £2.7m in 2020-2021, roughly 25 per cent more (or £570,000) than the £2.1m spent in 2019-20.Since he became chancellor in February last year, Mr Sunak has launched an extraordinary self-promotion drive that has raised eyebrows across Westminster.It has included tweeting out messages outlining coronavirus support programmes which include the chancellor’s personal signature. In advance of the March Budget, the Treasury released a five-minute-long high-quality video of Mr Sunak talking about his year in office.Read moreThe Treasury also has an institutional photographer – or “digital content editor and photo lead” – and took on a “digital content editor” last year.In recent weeks it has put out, with Treasury branding, a recorded zoom chat between the chancellor and celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay. Inside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayInside Politics newsletterThe latest news on Brexit, politics and beyond direct to your inbox every weekdayThe figures showing the overall Treasury communications budget increase were revealed, in an answer to a Commons question, by the exchequer secretary to the Treasury, Kemi Badenoch.Ms Badenoch said the increase in the Budget in 2020-21 had been “driven largely by the additional demands of responding to the coronavirus crisis including new [opinion polling] contracts”.The Treasury awarded contracts to Hanbury Strategy last year worth £68,000 and £171,000, one without competitive tender.Treasury sources refused to divulge the specific questions asked of participants but stressed that they were related to policy, rather than impressions of the chancellor.Yet the money spent on the contracts covers less than half of the £570,000 increase in communications spending between 2019-20 and 2020-21.The Independent understands the extra spending was not used to advertise directly to the public Treasury policies, such as the furlough scheme or the self-employment support grants.Sources suggested some new funding did go to new “digital capability”, but they stressed there had also been an additional need for general staffing resources too because of pressures arising from the unprecedented coronavirus emergency, and rejected the suggestion that the jump in communication spending was excessive.However, the figures are likely to intensify questions about whether it’s appropriate for the Treasury to be increasing public spending on its own communications in this manner, with at least some of it promoting the chancellor personally, especially at a time when Mr Sunak is pencilling in public spending cuts for unprotected departments next year.“It obviously raises eyebrows because it’s a departure from previous chancellors,” said Jill Rutter a former senior Treasury civil servant and now senior research fellow at the UK in a Changing Europe think tank.“The Treasury should be the most austere about doing this sort of thing. It needs to lead by example in clamping down on spending that looks a bit marginal.”Doubts have also been expressed over whether it’s appropriate for departments to be spending heavily on opinion polling, even if it is only related to policy.“Chancellors have got slapped in the face for being completely out of touch with public opinion, but it needs to be very directly linked in to helping them make policy better, rather than just crafting skillful media messages,” said Ms Rutter.“You want a Treasury that is aware of public opinion but you don’t want a Treasury that just manages the economy by focus group.”Labour drew a contrast between the 25 per cent increase in Treasury communications spending with the below-inflation pay rise proposed for nurses by the government next year.“Rishi Sunak’s mask is slipping,” said Bridget Phillipson, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury.“While he’s been splashing public cash on promoting his own brand, he’s been slashing pay for our NHS heroes. It’s clear where this chancellor’s priorities really lie.”A Treasury spokesperson said: “The Treasury has one of the smallest communications teams in Whitehall and has over the past year been dealing with the most significant economic crisis in living memory, including by delivering and communicating support schemes like furlough.” More