Markus Andrews

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailScotland’s former first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, called Boris Johnson a “f***ing clown” at the time of the second Covid lockdown, bombshell messages have revealed. WhatsApp messages shared between the ex-SNP leader and her top adviser, Liz Lloyd, shown at the Covid inquiry demonstrated the utter disdain with which the then-prime minister was held.Ms Sturgeon said Mr Johnson’s address announcing a second national lockdown on 31 October 2020 was “f***ing excruciating” and “awful”.She told Ms Lloyd: “His utter incompetence in every sense is now offending me on behalf of politicians everywhere,” adding: “He is a f***ing clown.”It came as Humza Yousaf, the SNP leader, admitted the Scottish government’s handling of information was “frankly poor” as he announced a review into its use of WhatsApp in a bid to end the controversy over deleted messages.The new messages shared at the inquiry on Thursday also revealed the extent to which Ms Sturgeon and her officials discussed the political implications of pandemic policies.The SNP government has come under fire in recent days after messages revealed top officials had discussed how to use the Covid crisis to forward the cause of Scottish independence.Ms Lloyd told Ms Sturgeon she wanted a “good old-fashioned rammy” with the Tory government so she could “think about something other than sick people”.Liz Lloyd, Nicola Sturgeon’s former top adviser, arriving at the Covid inquiry The adviser told Ms Sturgeon she had “set a timetable” for the UK government to answer the Scottish government on the furlough scheme as a “purely political” move in the November 2020 messages.Ms Sturgeon replied: “Yeah, I get it. And it might be worth doing. I’ve sent a rough formulation of what I might say tomorrow.”Asked if she was looking for a spat, Ms Lloyd replied: “I was looking for a spat with a purpose.” Handwritten notes also showed Ms Lloyd suggested a possible strategy of “calling for things” that the Scottish government could not do to “force the UK government to do things”.Ms Lloyd told the inquiry that the Scottish government were “clearly not complimentary” about the UK government’s way of communicating new rules with the public. “We had to mitigate the chaos that appeared around some of the decisions they took.”Discussing calls between the government, she said Mr Johnson “wasn’t well briefed, he wasn’t listening – engagement with him became slightly pointless”. Ms Lloyd added: “They didn’t get us anywhere.”Sturgeon is under scrutiny over her use of private emails and deletion of messages Last week, it emerged from Sturgeon cabinet meeting minutes from June 2020 that her ministers agreed to consider how the Covid crisis could be used to boost support for Scottish independence.Her ministers “agreed that consideration be given to restarting work on independence” with the case updated based on “arguments reflecting the experience of the coronavirus crisis”. The Scottish Tories said it was “disgusting” to use the crisis to “break up” the UK.Mr Yousaf rejected accusations the Scottish government made Covid decisions for political reasons. “Our motivation – every step of the way – was to ensure we kept the people of this country safe,” he told the Scottish parliament shortly before his own appearance at the inquiry.Appearing at the Covid inquiry, Mr Yousaf admitted the Scottish government’s handling of information was “frankly poor”. He said: “I apologise unreservedly to the inquiry and to those mourning the loss of a loved one.”The SNP leader announced that he had commissioned officials to deliver “an externally-led review” into the use of mobile messaging apps and the use of non-corporate technology in the Scottish government.Mr Yousaf later confirmed to the Covid inquiry that the review would not have access to messages deleted by ministers and senior officials.The SNP leader – Scotland’s health secretary during the pandemic – also admitted that he had used personal phones to conduct government business rather than a government-issued phone.The messages were all deleted “after a month for cyber security purposes”, according to a document from October 2023 that details how ministers used informal communications.However, Mr Yousaf realised some messages were recoverable as he had retained a previous phone handset. The SNP leader has maintained that he has personally handed over all his relevant Whatsapps to the inquiry.Humza Yousaf arriving at the Covid inquiry Ms Sturgeon’s use of private party emails is also under fresh scrutiny. It emerged that she had provided a public health expert with an SNP email address – saying she could be contacted “privately”. She told Professor Devi Sridhar: “Don’t worry about protocol.”Scottish Labour has demanded an investigation. But a source close to Ms Sturgeon denied concealment on Thursday – saying any emails relevant to the pandemic she received in her private inbox “were passed to the Scottish government”.Ms Sturgeon is also under pressure over deleted messages. The ex-SNP leader previously suggested that she had never used informal messages to make Covid decisions.It then emerged that messages were routinely deleted. But Ms Sturgeon has insisted that informal messages erased on her own devices were later obtained and submitted to the inquiry.Humza Yousaf defended his use of masks while giving evidenceMr Yousaf also defended his use of masks after it emerged that a top health adviser had told him he could be exempt while attending an event if he had “a drink in your hands at all times”.The first minister said national clinical director Professor Jason Leitch’s advice that “literally no one” followed mask guidance for standing in public places was simply him “over speaking”.He used the same term when defending Ms Sturgeon and the Scottish government’s decision-making after it emerged that Prof Leitch said the then-first minister “actually wanted none of us” in crucial meetings.The inquiry counsel asked Mr Yousaf if this was an indication that Ms Sturgeon “really took decisions in connection with the pandemic herself”.Mr Yousaf said there had been “times the former first minister needed a tighter cast list” for meetings, but denied cabinet ministers were not involved in big moves. “I think this is a classic example of Jason perhaps over speaking,” he added.Mr Yousaf also branded the Scottish Police Federation a “disgrace” in messages exchanged with former SNP deputy first minister, John Swinney, over the implementation of Covid rules. He said: “Sometimes when you are venting to a colleague you use language you regret.” Earlier, Ms Lloyd denied that a decision about guest limits on weddings showed she was involved in making up policy that was made “on the hoof” with Ms Sturgeon. She was shown messages exchanged on 22 September 2020, where Ms Sturgeon said: “We haven’t thought about weddings.”A media briefing was then delayed so a decision could be made to keep wedding and funeral numbers at 20. Ms Lloyd said a decision taken to change numbers would be “on the hoof”, but “sticking with a decision already taken was more coherent”. More

Sign up to our free Brexit and beyond email for the latest headlines on what Brexit is meaning for the UKSign up to our Brexit email for the latest insightRishi Sunak’s government has been urged to reassure Britons there will be no shortage of red roses for Valentine’s Day due to new Brexit checks.Fruit, vegetable and flower importers are urging the government to provide more detail on the wave of new red tape imposed on imports coming in at the end of January and April.And Dutch flower growers have called on Sunak government to delay the looming border controls – warning EU exporters are not ready.Labour MP Daniel Zeichner said British growers importing young plants, flowers seeds and other products were now “seriously worried” about the looming changes.The Horticultural Trade Association has warned that the process of importing a petunia plant from the Netherlands had gone from 19 to 59 steps, Mr Zeichner pointed out in the Commons.The MP asked: “So what’s the minister doing to ensure that we’ll have a plentiful supply of imported red roses for Valentine’s Day – especially for all those Conservatives on the other side who love each other so much?”Tory trade minister Greg Hands said the government had done a lot of work on the system for import checks “to make sure businesses are aware and the introduction of this will be staged”.Dover has seen waves of congestion and delay from post-Brexit rules Mr Hands said the new model will “simplify border processes for both imports and exports”, before going on to attack Labour’s plans for a new veterinary agreement with Brussels to ease trade friction.Mr Sunak’s government delayed the introduction of checks on EU imports until 2024 over fears the extra burden could push up food inflation, which is finally beginning to ease from the peaks of the cost of living crisis.New health certificates are required for imports from 31 January. Then there will be a further three months before sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) checks on medium-risk food, animal and plant products come into force on 30 April.Chris Bonnett, founder of Gardening Express, has warned the new checks could lead to a shortage of some flowers and plants. He said it is “likely that consumers will face the brunt of it all with increased prices of flowers and plants”.Earlier this month, the Dutch Association of Wholesalers in Floricultural Products said checks should be pushed back again until 2025 – warning of problems ahead of Valentine’s Day and Easter.James Barnes, chairman of the Horticultural Trades Association, has told the Financial Times that the new border system is “a disaster waiting to happen”.He added: “The fundamental issue is that the infrastructure isn’t in place to cope with the volume of trade that’s coming through.”The National Farmers’ Union (NFU) said the looming paperwork and inspections on imports could pose an “existential threat” to Britain’s horticultural businesses.The farming group said British growers who are dependent on young plants from the EU – such as soft fruits like strawberries and raspberries – look set to be hit by disruption. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailRishi Sunak has been warned that he will be breaking human rights law if his government ignores european court orders intended to stop asylum seekers being sent to Rwanda. The prime minister has repeatedly vowed not to let what he called a “foreign court” to block the government’s plan to send some migrants to the east-African nation. But the president of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), Síofra O’Leary, said on Thursday that “there is a clear legal obligation” for states to comply with orders from the Strasbourg court. Demands called rule 39 interim measures can be issued by the ECHR in certain circumstances, and one such order contributed to the 2022 grounding of the first flight intended to take asylum seekers to Rwanda. Sunak has been warned he could be breaking European human rights lawMs O’Leary told a press conference: “There is a clear legal obligation under the convention for states to comply with rule 39 measures.”She said the interim measures are only issued “in exceptional circumstances where there is a real and imminent risk of irreparable harm”. Senior judge Ms O’Leary said the UK “has always complied with rule 39 measures”, except in one very particular case, and has “publicly declared the need for other states to comply with rule 39 indications”.The UK had previously urged Vladimir Putin’s Russia to abide by a 2021 measure in relation to the release of opposition leader Alexei Navalny.No 10 rejected the criticism and insisted the government’s Rwanda legislation would not need any emergency interventions from the Strasbourg court.Mr Sunak’s official spokesman said: “We are confident our legislation is compliant with our international obligations … There should be no need for Strasburg to intervene to block flights in the way they did in 2022.”But the top No 10 official added: “We’ve also drafted the bill to give ministers the power not to comply with those rulings if necessary … The prime minister has been clear repeatedly that we will not let a foreign court block flights from taking off.”The spokesman said the combination of the Rwanda legislation and the new treaty with the African country would see off any need for a Rule 39 measure from the ECHR.UK had urged Putin’s Russia to abide by European court injunction in Alexei Navalny’s case No 10 also rejected any comparison as “bizarre” between the UK urging Russia to follow rule 39 injunctions over Navalny, and Tory ministers potentially ignoring the injunctions over Rwanda.Mr Sunak’s official spokesman said: “I think it would be bizarre to draw any comparison between Russia’s cruel treatment of Alexei Navalny … and our plan to protect and deter vulnerable migrants from making perilous crossings across the Channel.” The UK did not follow a rule 39 order in 2010 when the Strasbourg court tried to prevent British forces from transfering two men, who were suspected of being part of a plot to kill British servicemen, over to the Iraqi authorities. The UK transfered the pair despite the order. The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Bill going through Parliament severely limits the ability of the UK courts to intervene to stop asylum seekers being sent to Rwanda. As a result, it will become more likely that these legal challenges end up in front of the Strasbourg Court. Mr Sunak has previously insisted that he “won’t allow a foreign court to block us from flights taking off”, telling reported: “My patience is worn thin, the British people’s patience is worn thin.”Asked directly if he would over-rule rule 39 orders from the ECHR, Mr Sunak said it would be “for ministers to decide whether to comply”. He added: “I would not have put that clause in the bill if I was not prepared to use it.”The Strasbourg court president would not be drawn on the Safety of Rwanda Bill while it goes through the parliamentary process.But she said: “I know there’s a very healthy debate in the United Kingdom relating to the content of the bill. It’s a country which is blessed with many, many international legal experts and a very active civil society. So I am sure that all of those issues can be fully examined.”In the Rwanda case in June 2022, the interim measure blocking an Iraqi asylum seeker being sent to the African state was granted just hours before the flight was due to take off.Ms O’Leary said rule 39 measures are almost always sought in “situations of urgency, if not extreme urgency, and the nature of the urgency or the degree of urgency is something which respondent governments control”.Dogs in the street know Rwanda flights won’t happen, says former Tory leaderThe interim injunction powers are rarely used – in 2023, 13 requests were refused by the court, and just one interim measure was granted.Rwanda has said that it would not be able to continue with the UK deal if Mr Sunak’s goverment did not abide by international law.Rwanda’s minister of foreign affairs Vincent Biruta has said previously: “It has always been important to both Rwanda and the UK that our rule of law partnership meets the highest standards of international law, and it places obligations on both the UK and Rwanda to act lawfully. “Without lawful behaviour by the UK, Rwanda would not be able to continue with the Migration and Economic Development Partnership.” More