Markus Andrews

The former attorney general has called for the government to show greater “political maturity” when it loses court cases, rather than attacking judges and lawyers.Ministers have criticised high-profile decisions, including over Isis bride Shamima Begum’s citizenship, Brexit and Boris Johnson’s prorogation of parliament.But Dominic Grieve QC said they should see legal defeats as a “helpful” way to reflect on what went wrong and how to govern better.“A bit more maturity at a political level might help the executive and ministers accept some of these judgments, rather than just seeing it as another problem because there’s going to be an adverse headline in a newspaper the following morning,” he told parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights on Wednesday.Critics have suggested that human rights hamstring government policy and actions on issues such as national security, but Mr Grieve said that he never felt the government was being “rendered ineffective” by legal cases.“While ministerial colleagues understandably were sometimes irritated by some of the consequences of judgments, or the litigation surrounding it, you have to ask if it’s a price worth paying for maintaining the standards contained within the convention,” he added.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 weekdayMr Grieve said the law had allowed individuals to enforce their human rights, and that public authorities had been forced to consider rights in decisions such as concerning the wellbeing of children and vulnerable people in their decisions.The government has launched a review of the Human Rights Act to question whether courts are being “unduly drawn into questions of policy”.It will also consider if the act “strikes the correct balance between the roles of the courts, the government and parliament”, and if reforms should be made.Mr Grieve, a barrister and former Conservative MP who served as attorney general between 2010 and 2014, said there was “no problem at all” with balance.“The executive has always been subject to the scrutiny of the court and if it ceases to be we are living in a very very bad environment indeed, because parliament cannot do that on its own,” he added.Shamima Begum should be allowed to return to UK to pursue appeal, court rulesMr Grieve said there were a small number of incidents where courts may have “overstepped the mark”, but that was not driven by the Human Rights Act itself.Lord Neuberger, the former president of the Supreme Court, said that negative media coverage of controversial judicial decisions risked “distorting” the public’s understanding of human rights laws.The retired judge, who served as president of the Supreme Court between 2012 and 2017, told the committee the UK’s “constitutional balance has not been interfered with” by the law.“Since the advent of the Human Rights Act, the consciousness of fundamental rights has permeated public authorities and other authorities in a beneficial way which has not happened before,” he added.The Human Rights Act 1998 was created to bring the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into British law, meaning cases could be decided in the UK rather than going to Strasbourg.The government has committed to remaining a signatory of the ECHR following Brexit, and its compliance is a condition for maintaining a security deal and other agreements with the EU.Mr Grieve questioned what changes could be made to the Human Rights Act without derogating from the ECHR, adding: “Unless you want to put the country in position where it does not adhere to the ECHR then what you can do is quite small.”He said that in 2006, David Cameron asked him to review the law’s operation, and that the commission he drew up came to the same conclusions but the report was “put in a bottom drawer and never published”.Lord Neuberger summarised his view by saying “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, but said that some minor improvements could potentially be made.The Human Rights Act review, which the Conservatives committed to in their 2019 election manifesto, is separate from a separate assessment of the judicial review process.The Lord Chief Justice defendant the Human Rights Act in May, telling MPs he was concerned about confusion between the two.“It is important to bear in mind that to the extent that the Human Rights Act is engaged, the judges have been following precisely what parliament asked them to do,” he told MPs.When announcing the review in December, the government said it was committed to upholding the UK’s stature on human rights but that a review was “timely” after two decades of the Human Rights Act being in operation.“We need to make sure that our human rights framework, as with the rest of our legal framework, develops and is refined to ensure it continues to meet the needs of the society it serves,” a spokesperson added. More

Transphobia should be treated with “zero tolerance” and tackled in the same way as racism or homophobia, Scotland first minister Nicola Sturgeon has said.The SNP leader said “silence was not an option” in a message addressing reports that a “significant” number of young people had left the party due its stance on the issue.It comes amid a deepening row within the party over “differences of opinion” on gender recognition.
In a video message posted to Twitter on Tuesday night, Ms Sturgeon said she would “do everything” she could to persuade young people that the SNP “is your party”.
She said: “I know many of you personally, I consider you friends, I have campaigned alongside you.
“You are a credit to our party, and our country. It grieves me deeply you have reached this decision, after much soul-searching, because you consider the SNP to be, at this stage, not a safe, tolerant or welcoming place for trans people.”
In a speech she claimed was unscripted, the first minister added: “That’s not acceptable to me as SNP leader, and I will do everything I can to change that impression and persuade all of you that the SNP is your party and that you should come home where you belong.”
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 weekdayTensions have also been building in the SNP over proposed amendments to the Scottish government’s Hate Crime Bill.  Critics say the changes fail to protect transgender people.Earlier this month, a prominent equalities campaigner quit the SNP and called for an independent inquiry into alleged transphobia within the party.Teddy Hope, a former transgender officer for the official LGBT wing of the SNP, Out for Indy, claimed the party has become a “core hub for transphobia” in Scotland and said the SNP has turned its back on the transgender community. More

In a new government U-turn, business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng has called off a controversial review of workers’ rights which could have seen the maximum 48-hour week scrapped after Brexit.The review, launched by Mr Kwarteng’s predecessor Alok Sharma, was looking at a comprehensive shake-up of employment protections after the UK was released from EU rules at the end of the transition to Brexit on 1 January.Reports suggested it was focusing on ending the 48-hour week, changing rules on rest breaks and not including overtime when calculating holiday pay entitlements.Despite government insistence that they had no intention of lowering workers’ rights, it sparked fury from unions and Labour.Opponents of Brexit warned it marked the start of a bonfire of employment, consumer and environmental protections as Boris Johnson looked for ways to exploit the UK’s new freedom to “diverge” from EU regulations such as the Working Time Directive.Now Mr Kwarteng has told civil servants to stop work on the project.He told ITV’s Peston: “So the review is no longer happening within the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).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“I made it very very clear to officials in the department that we’re not interested in watering down workers’ rights.”He added: “I can’t have been more clear about this on a number of occasions. I’ve said repeatedly that Brexit gives us the opportunity to have higher standards and a higher growth economy and that’s what officials in the department are 100 per cent focused on.”Mr Kwarteng replaced Mr Sharma at the helm of BEIS on 8 January when his predecessor was appointed full-time president of the COP26 United Nations climate change conference, taking place in Glasgow in November.Soon after his appointment, he tweeted: “We are not going to lower the standards of workers’ rights … We want to protect and enhance workers’ rights not row back on them.”But speaking to a committee of MPs last week he confirmed that the review was under way.“I think the view was that we wanted to look at the whole range of issues relating to our EU membership and examine what we wanted to keep, if you like,” he said on 19 January.Labour’s employment rights spokesman Andy McDonald welcomed the ditching of the review.“Congratulations to those who campaigned against the government’s plan to rip up workers’ rights and forced this U-turn,” he said.“Employment rights should be strengthened, not weakened. The government should start by outlawing fire and rehire tactics.” More

Mass badger culling will end after next year, the government has signalled, after years of controversy about the practice.
But wildlife campaigners expressed caution, the Badger Trust saying it remained “to be convinced of the sincerity of any commitment to bring the cull to an end”.
At the same time as the announcement, the government published figures showing 38,642 badgers were killed under four-year licences last year.
But the real figure is even higher because the 38,642 does not include “supplementary” licences, the trust warned.
The number is up on the previous year’s toll of 35,034.
Four months ago, The Independent revealed how leading scientists and wildlife experts including Jane Goodall and Virginia McKenna  issued a direct plea to Boris Johnson to cancel a planned badger cull expansion.The cull was designed to reduce the transmission of tuberculosis (TB) from badgers to cattle.
It prompted protests from the start, with opponents arguing it was not just cruel, but also actively spread TB, because when setts are disrupted, badgers will move about more than ever, potentially carrying disease with them.
Now, environment Secretary George Eustice has set out proposals for Natural England (NE) to stop issuing the current intensive cull licences for new areas after 2022, and to enable new licences to be cut short if the chief veterinary officer agrees.  Branding culling “unacceptable”, he said he was also planning to restrict any new supplementary cull licences to two years and stop re-issuing such licences in any areas where supplementary culling has previously been licensed.
Some 102,349 wild badgers have been killed since the current cull began in 2013, according to the Badger Trust.
Mr Eustice is also launching a public consultation and a call for views on proposals and longer-term options on how to curb TB in cattle.
In a written parliamentary statement, he said: “The bTB eradication strategy we published in 2014 is making progress. We are now seeing sustained improvements in the high-risk area. We need to build on this momentum to achieve bTB-free status for England by 2038.”He said work on developing a cattle vaccine was on track to be completed within five years.  Last year ministers were accused of breaking a pledge to end the culling of badgers by expanding projects to trap and shoot the animals.The Badger Trust said Mr Eustice’s announcement was “a real bag of mixed messages” and the charity was not confident that it did signal the end of the badger cull.  The Trust questioned the decision to release the figures on the same day as the announcement, “with the perceived – yet questionable – ‘good news’ ahead of the ‘very bad news’”.
It said another 38,000 or more badgers were likely to be culled this year, “paying the ultimate price for a policy based on highly controversial science”.
Dominic Dyer, a former Badger Trust chief executive, said: “In some areas of England the badger population has been so depleted by culling that the species is in danger of becoming locally extinct from areas which it has inhabited since the Ice Age.  “The government has dithered and delayed on finding on finding an exit strategy to badger culling.”
But he said ending issuing new licences was better for farmers, taxpayers and the future of badgers and marked “the beginning of the end of one of the darkest chapters in the history of farming and wildlife protection in England”.
Mr Eustice added: “I envisage that in future, some form of culling would be an option in exceptional circumstances to address any local disease flare-ups. This transitional period will also give us time to undertake badger vaccination pilots and develop our future badger vaccination policy.” More

Ministers have reversed attempts by the House of Lords to explicitly ban the state from authorising undercover agents to commit murder, torture or rape as part of operations.Peers made several changes to the controversial Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill, including a ban on the most serious crimes and strict curbs and safeguards on the use of children and vulnerable people as operatives.However, MPs voted 363 to 267 on Wednesday to remove the explicit ban from the bill, with a government minister arguing that the Human Rights Act already provides safeguards.The bill aims to protect undercover operatives from prosecution if they are forced to break the law during operations, and also seeks to define circumstances in which operatives can commit crime – replacing various pieces of overlapping legislation.It will cover law enforcement and government agencies, including the intelligence services, police, the National Crime Agency, the armed forces and the Prison Service.Speaking in the House of Commons, solicitor general Michael Ellis committed to hold further talks over the matter of child covert intelligence sources, acknowledging that it “may be appropriate” to specify some safeguards in the bill from the existing code of practice.He added this could include confirmation that a juvenile can only be authorised in “exceptional circumstances”.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“Any authorisation which is not compliant with the Human Rights Act would be unlawful, and nothing in this bill seeks to undermine the important protections in that Act,” Mr Ellis told MPs.“However, were we to place explicit limits on the face of the Bill that would create the risk to the operational tactics involved and to the safety of the covert human intelligence source and the general public at large.”He went on to argue that including a “checklist” within the legislation for what operatives could do would “make it very easy” for criminal gangs and others to develop “initiation tests” to root out undercover agents.In the debate on the bill, Conservative former minister David Davis described the practice of using children as undercover informants as “very largely a morally repugnant policy”.“It results in children being put in dangerous positions during the investigation of serious and violent crimes with, frankly, minimal safeguards in place,” Mr Davis said.“The Investigatory Powers Commissioner has already confirmed that child spies can themselves often be part of violent gangs or continuing victims of child sexual abuse when they’re recruited as an intelligence source.”He added: “We should normally be moving heaven and earth to remove these children from their horrible situations. “Instead, this bill would allow them to be sent back into harm’s way with minimal safeguards in place.”Additional reporting by PA More

A senior Conservative MP has been accused of spreading “dangerous misinformation” after reportedly suggesting official statistics on the pandemic had been “manipulated”.Labour is calling for action to be taken over a series of remarks alleged to have been made by Sir Desmond Swayne during an interview with anti-lockdown group Save Our Rights UK in November.In a video clip obtained by Sky News, Sir Desmond is reported to have commented on the threat of Covid-19 by saying: “It seems to be a manageable risk, particularly as figures have been manipulated.”We’re told there is a deathly, deadly pandemic proceeding at the moment. That is difficult to reconcile with ICUs [intensive care units] actually operating at typical occupation levels for the time of year and us bouncing round at the typical level of deaths for the time of year.”According to Sky News, he later told the group: “As the last [House of Commons] Speaker used to say… he’d say ‘Persist! Persist!’ That’s my advice – persist.”The Tory MP also gave an interview to the prominent US anti-vaxxer Del Bigtree, who has repeatedly spread conspiracy theories about Covid-19 on his webshow and produced a documentary film with the discredited anti-vaccination activist Andrew Wakefield.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 weekdayMr Bigtree’s account on YouTube was shut down last year due to violating rules on pandemic misinformation.In an interview this month, Sir Desmond told Mr Bigtree that he was “certain” some aspects of the government’s pandemic policy were designed for “social control”, such as the wearing of masks in public spaces.Save Our Rights UK presents itself as a group concerned with opposing the government’s lockdown restrictions and social distancing rules.However, it has also made comments questioning Covid-19 vaccines and suggests on its website that the jabs have been “rushed through safety testing”.In a brief statement issued on Wednesday evening, Sir Desmond said the Sky News report was “wrong” and denied that he held anti-vaccination views.“Sky is wrong. Aside from my question to the PM this afternoon, an examination of my blogs will reveal that I am a most enthusiastic vaccinator,” he wrote on Twitter.When challenged about the interviews, the Tory MP also told Sky News that he was entitled to make his point of view on any platform.“I’m entitled to answer legitimate questions that people put to me,” he said.“It does not in any way mean that I accept points of view that they hold.”In a letter to the Conservative Party, Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner described the MP’s reported comments as “extremely concerning” and warned they could undermine the UK’s fight against the pandemic.Ms Rayner accused  Sir Desmond of spreading “dangerous misinformation” about Covid-19.“During this interview, the MP for New Forest West endorsed conspiracy theories about the veracity of the disease,” Ms Rayner said in her letter to Conservative chair Amanda Milling.“He also suggested the official figures have been manipulated – a deeply dangerous claim for which there is absolutely no evidence.”She added: “Following Desmond Swayne’s shocking refusal to apologise for his behaviour, I urge you to make clear what action you will take. It is the duty of all of us to support the national effort to vaccinate Britain.”The Independent has approached Sir Desmond for further comment. More

Scotland would have been unable to fight Covid-19 as effectively without England’s backing, Boris Johnson will claim on a visit north of the border.
The prime minister will walk into the lion’s den – three months before an expected SNP election landslide – with a plea to Scots to recognise the might of the UK lies behind the battle against the pandemic.
It is the UK that has bought up vaccines and supplied rapid test kits, while the British Army set up vaccine centres and 999 calls were diverted to English centres amid a staff shortage, he will say.
“We are delivering for the people of Scotland so we can ensure the strongest possible recovery from the virus,” Mr Johnson will tell Scots.
The visit comes after Nicola Sturgeon raised the stakes by planning to stage an advisory independence referendum – if the prime minister refuses to give his consent to the poll.
An 11-point roadmap for a second vote, published at the weekend, argued there would be “no moral or democratic justification” for denying a request, if the SNP triumphs at Holyrood in May.
Such a position would be “unsustainable both at home and abroad”, it said, after Mr Johnson suggested Scots wait more than 30 years for another independence bid.
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 weekdayMs Sturgeon has accused him of being “frightened of democracy”, saying: “If the SNP win the Scottish election in a few months’ time, then what democrat could rightly stand in the way?”On his visit, Mr Johnson will attempt to swerve that controversy by stressing the benefits of the Union, including:
* 80 vaccine centres “the British Armed Forces is helping to establish” – with more than 415,000 Scots having received jabs already.
* London procuring “vaccine supply on behalf of all parts of the UK” – with vaccination rates much higher than across the EU.
* One third of Scottish ambulance calls taken by centres in England last weekend – following “a high level of staff absence in the Scottish Ambulance Service”.* More than 1 million rapid lateral flow test kits delivered – with funding for 24 drive and walk-through testing centres and 21 mobile testing units.* No less than 62 per cent of testing kits in Scotland “provided” by the UK government.
Mr Johnson will say: “The great benefits of cooperation across the whole of the UK have never been clearer than since the beginning of this pandemic.
“We have pulled together to defeat the virus, providing £8.6bn to the Scottish government to support public services whilst also protecting the jobs of more than 930,000 citizens in Scotland.”
The prime minister is certain to face strong criticism of the impact of his Brexit deal, although he is unlikely to meet people outside of carefully-arranged visits.
Furious Scots fishermen have accused him of “betrayal” after the Christmas Eve trade agreement shut some out of crucial EU markets and created a mountain of damaging red tape. More

Britain and the EU stand on the brink of a vicious vaccine war, after Brussels demanded the diversion of coronavirus jabs produced in Oxford and Keele to make up for shortfalls on the continent.Europe’s health commissioner, Stella Kyriakides, sent a blunt message to pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca after it announced a 60 per cent cut in projected supplies for the EU, telling the Anglo-Swedish company that it was obliged to hand over doses intended for the UK.But AZ insisted that its contracts made clear that the UK had first claim on vaccines produced domestically, and said its agreement with the European Commission was based on a promise to make “best efforts” to deliver the doses, but did not commit the company to a specific timetable.Boris Johnson steered clear of confrontation with the EU, dodging the question at a Downing Street press conference of whether he might slap an export ban on UK-produced vaccine.But he left no doubt that he expects the UK’s contract with AZ for 2 million doses a week to continue unbroken.“We are very confident in our supplies, we are very confident in our contracts and we are going ahead on that basis,” said the prime minister.In conciliatory comments, the Mr Johnson added: “We in the UK firmly believe that the creation of vaccines is as a result of international exchange, international partnerships, and the distribution of vaccines around the world is also going to be a great multinational, international effort.”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 weekdayPressure on EU leaders is driven by the 27-nation bloc’s sluggish start to its vaccination programme, which has seen just 2 per cent of the population protected, compared to around 10 per cent in the UK.AZ’s announcement last week that a yield problem in its Belgian plant would mean the EU’s 80 million doses by the end of March being cut to 31 million came after US company Pfizer also reduced production in its European facility in order to allow an upgrade.Brussels’ anger was not calmed by the explanation from AZ chief executive Pascal Soriot that “glitches” in its EU supply chain resulted from the European Commission taking three months longer than London to seal a deal.Ms Kyriakides told a Brussels press conference: “We reject the logic of first come, first served. That may work at the neighbourhood butchers but not in contracts.”She insisted that the contract signed with AZ, which worked with Oxford University on the development of its vaccine, covers production from the two UK plants.“There is no hierarchy of the factories. You are aware in the contracts there are four factories listed but it does not differentiate between the UK and Europe. The UK factories are part of our advance purchase agreements and that is why they have to deliver,” she said.“We expect the doses that are in an advance purchase agreement to be delivered to the European Union.”Ms Kyriakides said later on Wednesday the EU and AstraZeneca had failed to make a breakthrough in talks over vaccine deliveries.
“We regret the continued lack of clarity on the delivery schedule,” she said in a tweet, adding the EU was requesting a clear plan from AstraZeneca for the rapid delivery of the vaccine doses the bloc has reserved for the first quarter.
The EU contract envisaged the supply of at least 300 million doses, providing the vaccine was approved as safe and effective. The European Medicines Agency has yet to approve the AZ vaccine for use, with a decision expected on Friday.EU officials said the best-effort clause was standard for contracts on products in development, but did not relieve the company of an obligation to show an overall effort to develop and deliver the vaccines to the best of its abilities.They added the firm had not provided sufficient explanations on why doses could not be shipped from stocks at factories which experienced no production problem, like those in Britain.In a mark of growing distrust, there was a public row after EU officials accused AZ of pulling out of a planned meeting on Wednesday evening to discuss the impasse, only for the company to say it was attending.And German MEP Peter Liese, a member of the European Parliament’s health committee, said that the UK had “better think twice” about trying to hog a vaccine that he said was “developed with the aid of the German state and European Union money”.Mr Liese told Euronews: “If there is anyone thinking that European citizens would accept that we give this high-quality vaccine to the UK and accept to be treated as second-class by a UK-based company, I think the only consequence can be immediately to stop the export of the biotech.“Then we are in the middle of a trade war. So the company and the UK better think twice … If it’s UK first, we need to tell other companies in the world if you treat the Europeans as second class, you will suffer for this.”Ms Kyriakides backed away from a threat issued on Monday to block the export of vaccines produced within the EU.“Let me be absolutely clear, the European Union is not imposing an export ban on vaccines or restricting the export of vaccines to third countries,” she said.UK Covid-19 vaccinations: Latest figures“What we have proposed as a Commission is an export transparency mechanism. What it will do is bring clarity on the production capacity of manufacturers.”Mr Johnson admitted there would be “ups and downs” in the UK’s vaccination programmes, after the latest official figures showed 220,249 doses were given on Sunday, 279,757 on Monday and 311,060 on Tuesday – well down on the figures in excess of 400,000 achieved on the previous three days, including a record 491,970 on Saturday.“Don’t forget that these are vaccines that have only just been invented and the batches are only just being approved,” he told the Downing Street press conference.“I think one of the things that we said at the beginning is that there would be bumps, there would ups and downs, particularly in these early phases as production gets under way.”The government’s chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, said: “Ten years ago we wouldn’t have been able to do this. That is the extraordinary thing that’s happened.“The new vaccine technologies have come along that have allowed this to happen. Ten years ago, if this had happened, we would not be in this position. It’s remarkable.”Commenting on the “lumpiness of supply”, he added: “This isn’t making widgets, these are complex, quality controlled, biological processes.“It’s not surprising that the supply goes up and down a bit. There will be changes week on week and that’s to be expected.” More