Markus Andrews

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster email For months, Albanian opposition parties have used flares and noise to disrupt Parliament, in protest at what they describe as the authoritarian rule of the governing Socialist Party. On Thursday, lawmakers passed the annual budget and other draft laws, despite opposition claims that the left-wing Socialists have blocked the establishment of commissions to investigate allegations of government corruption. The disturbances started in October just before prosecutors accused Sali Berisha, 79, former prime minister and president and now the main leader of the center-right Democratic Party, of corruption over of a land-buying scheme that’s under legal investigation in the capital, Tirana. Opposition parliamentarians regularly pile up chairs, use flares, start small fires and even physically grab microphones when their Socialist counterparts take the floor.The governing Socialists, led by Prime Minister Edi Rama, hold 74 of the 140 seats in Parliament, enough to pass the 2024 budget in an eight-minute vote and then close the session.The opposition pledges to step up its fight until its right to establish investigative committees is accepted.The disruption in Parliament may be an obstacle to much-needed reforms at a time when the European Union has agreed to start the process of harmonizing Albanian laws with those of the EU. Last year, the bloc agreed to launch membership negotiations with Albania and North Macedonia. After 18 months of vetting, Brussels said Albania is ready to take the next step and begin negotiating specific chapters.Albania has been a member of NATO since 2009. WHY IS THE OPPOSITION PROTESTING?The opposition is protesting the use of Public Private Partnership projects, or PPP, launched by Rama’s Cabinet. Because the government lacks funds of its own, it puts capital projects out to tender by private companies, who then receive an annual fee for several years. The opposition claims the public money from the PPPs has been misused for personal profit, and the parliamentary investigative commissions would probe alleged cases of corruption involving Rama and other top government officials.In September, a former Albanian environment minister was convicted and imprisoned, along with other officials, for bribery over a contract to build an incinerator.A former Socialist deputy prime minister left the country after being accused of corruption in a case linked to another incinerator. A former Socialist health minister has also been accused of corruption over a PPP contract worth 100 million euros ($100 million) for a lab to sterilize and distribute medical equipment. The government says the opposition’s requests are unconstitutional, following a ruling from the Constitutional Court that a parliamentary commission cannot be set up while the judiciary is dealing with a case. PROTESTS YIELD NO RESULTS FOR A DIVIDED OPPOSITION After 10 years in opposition, the center-right Democratic Party is weakened and fractured, with the main grouping led by Berisha, the longest-serving politician in post-communist Albania.In May 2021 Berisha and his family members were barred by the United States from entering the country, and later also the United Kingdom, because of their alleged involvement in corruption.Prime Minister Rama says Berisha is exploiting what remains of the once-dominant Democratic Party for his personal profit in the legal battle. While previously he could gather thousands of supporters at rallies, Berisha is now limited to disrupting sessions of Parliament. ANY SOLUTION IN SIGHT?Opposition lawmakers have pledged to step up their protests, without explaining how. Berisha has called for “civil disobedience,” but so far only Parliament has been disrupted. Calls for rallies have failed to turn into reality.For their part, the governing Socialists are trying to work as normal, noting that Parliament has approved the largest budget ever, twice the size of 2013 when the Democrats left power.Both sides are maintaining their stance, with no sign of sitting down to find a solution, which in post-communist Albania has often come only after intervention by international mediators.___Follow Llazar Semini at https://twitter.com/lsemini More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailThe fund management firm co-founded by former business secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg is to be wound down after recently losing its largest client.London-based Somerset Capital Management said it was in advanced discussions to transfer its key UK funds, along with their investment managers, to a new investment adviser, but would be “closing its wider institutional business in London”.Somerset has seen its assets under management plunge after its biggest client, St James’s Place, last month ended its relationship with the firm, dealing a massive blow as it withdrew a reported 2.5 billion US dollars (£2 billion) in assets.The move is said to have unsettled remaining clients with Somerset.Sir Jacob co-founded Somerset with two other colleagues in 2007, and the Conservative MP has retained a minority stake in the firm.At its height five years ago, Somerset had around 10 billion US dollars (£7.9 billion) in assets under management and, not long after, is understood to have rejected a takeover approach worth up to £90 million from rival Artemis Investment Management.But the recent client outflows have left it with a reported 1 billion US dollars (£794 million) in assets as of October.Oliver Crawley, partner at Somerset, said: “It has been a privilege to manage capital for world-leading institutions and clients for over 16 years.”He said that if talks to transfer funds – including the top performing Somerset Asia Income Fund and Somerset Emerging Market Dividend Growth Fund – were agreed, “this will ensure the seamless continuity of these funds and their managers, while positioning them for continued growth”.He added: “The current teams have delivered strong performance for their investors and continue to do so.“We hope a transition can be secured which we believe will give the funds a bright future.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailEmbattled Tory leader Rishi Sunak will be grilled about his actions during the pandemic when he appears before the Covid inquiry on Monday.The PM is fighting to save his premiership after resignation of immigration minister Robert Jenrick, as he failed to appease the Tory right with his Rwanda legislation.Adding to Mr Sunak’s woes, it emerged that he will be hauled up in front of the public inquiry within days to answer questions about his time as chancellor.He is likely to be questioned about the impact of his controversial policies such as the Eat Out to Help Out scheme to boost the restaurant trade during a resurgence of the virus.Government advisers referred to Mr Sunak as “Dr Death” during the pandemic, WhatsApp messages shown to the UK Covid-19 Inquiry have revealed, because of concerns about the impact of his push to keep economic activity going.The correspondence between epidemiologist Professor John Edmunds and Professor Dame Angela McLean – now chief scientific adviser to the government – took place during a meeting in September 2020.Dame Angela messaged Prof Edmunds, referring to “Dr Death the Chancellor”, the inquiry was told.Sunak will be under scrutiny over ‘Eat Out to Help Out’ Prof Edmunds told the inquiry the reference “could well be” about the Eat Out to Help Out scheme, which was devised by then-chancellor Mr Sunak and deployed a month earlier in a bid to kickstart the restaurant industry following lockdown.The announcement that Mr Sunak will face a whole day of questioning on Monday came as former prime minister Boris Johnson began his second day of questioning.Baroness Hallett’s inquiry has heard that scientists and then-health secretary Matt Hancock were left out of discussions around the Eat Out to Help Out scheme, which offered discounted meals in summer 2020 to help the hospitality trade after lockdown measures were lifted.Mr Hancock told the inquiry he was not told about the scheme until the day it was announced and “argued very strongly” against the possibility of extending it at the end of August 2020.The inquiry has also heard that former chief scientific adviser Professor Sir Patrick Vallance, England’s chief medical officer Professor Sir Chris Whitty and their former deputies Dame Angela and Sir Jonathan Van-Tam were also not told about the scheme.Sir Jonathan said: “I would have said ‘This is exactly encouraging what we’ve been trying to suppress and get on top of in the last few months’. So it didn’t feel sensible to me.”Prof Edmunds said he did not want to blame Eat Out To Help Out for the second Covid-19 wave, but the “optics” around the scheme were “terrible”.He said he understood the restaurant sector needed support, but that this “was not really just supporting them”.“They could have just given them money,” he added. “This was a scheme to encourage people to take an epidemiological risk.”In response to the comments, inquiry counsel Hugo Keith said: “To make it clear, there is very little or there’s weak epidemiological evidence to show that infections in the areas in which people took up the scheme went up significantly. Your point is at the optics of it.”Prof Edmunds said advisers were measuring public behaviour in August and at the time there was a change. He added: “I wouldn’t say it was Eat Out To Help Out, but it was contributing.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailSuella Braverman has denied trying to oust Rishi Sunak by “spreading poison” in the Tory party, as the PM was left reeling from the shock resignation of Robert Jenrick as immigration minister.Mr Sunak’s premiership has been rocked by the resignation of Ms Braverman’s ally, as the PM failed to appease the Tory right with his plan to “disapply” the UK Human Rights Act in Rwanda deportation cases.Mr Sunak will hold a press conference at 11am this morning as he faces a growing crisis over his Rwanda plans, with No 10 said to be increasingly worried by the number of no-confidence letters being submitted by Tory MPs.In a bruising interview of BBC Radio 4, the sacked home secretary defended her outspoken attacks on Mr Sunak and piled further pressure on him by insisting his Rwanda deportation legislation is doomed to fail. Ms Braverman said she was merely being “honest” and would not “shy away” from make further controversial comments. “If that upsets polite society I am sorry about it,” she said.The right-winger – who has claimed Mr Sunak is “weak” – was challenged by Today programmer interviewer Nick Robinson, who told her: “You are a headline grabber and you do it by spreading poison, even within your own party.”Ms Braverman replied: “Sometimes honesty is uncomfortable, but I’m not going to shy away from telling people how it is and from plain speaking, and if that upsets polite society, then I’m sorry about that.”The tense exchange came as Ms Braverman attacked Mr Sunak’s legislation, saying: “This bill will fail.” She said the reality “is it won’t work and it will not stop the boats.”Former home secretary Suella Braverman said she would not ‘shy away from telling people how it is’ The right of the party furious that the PM chose not to opt out of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Mr Sunak is reportedly worried by the number of no confidence letters being submitted – amid warnings he could soon face a leadership challenge.In his scathing resignation letter, Mr Jenrick made clear he wanted to bypass the ECHR – calling the bill “a triumph of hope over experience”. And Ms Braverman told the BBC the bill “will allow a merry go round of legal claims and litigation. Ultimately, this bill will fail.”Since being fired, Ms Braverman is widely seen to be plotting a bid to succeed Mr Sunak. On Wednesday she warned the PM that the Tories were heading for “electoral oblivion” if he failied to thwart international human rights law.But she denied speculation she is plotting to bring down Mr Sunak’s government, saying “no one’s talking about leadership or changing leadership”. “That’s nonsense,” she told the BBC.Robert Jenrick said Sunak bill is ‘triumph of hope over experience’ In an extraordinary exchange, Ms Braverman was repeatedly asked whether Mr Sunak was “lying” when he claimed the Rwandan government had threatened to pull out of the deal if Britain breached international treaties. “I don’t know [whether he is lying],” she eventually said.A No 10 accused Ms Braverman of denying reality. A Downing Street source said: “Conservatives need to work within reality. What she wants isn’t available, the Rwandans have said no.”Mr Sunak also fired back at Mr Jenrick – telling him his resignation was based on a “fundamental misunderstanding of the situation”. The PM said Rwanda would “collapse the entire scheme” if he had gone any further.The Tory leader is reportedly ready to threatens to call an election if right-wing MPs threaten to vote against his legislation. The PM is considering making the vital showdown on the legislation next week – with a vote expected on Tuesday – a confidence issue.Convention dictates that the PM would either resign or dissolving parliament and call an election if he loses such a vote. However, No 10 sources have denied that next week’s showdown vote will be treated as a confidence vote in the government.Cabinet minister Chris Heaton-Harris played down the chances of Rishi Sunak facing a vote on his leadership as “very unlikely”. The Northern Ireland secretary told LBC: “I’d say vanishingly small.”Mr Heaton-Harris added: “I don’t think it’s as a big a story as is being made. I don’t like anybody resigning from my party, but when I was Boris Johnson’s chief whip… Pretty much everyone did. Maybe I have a scale of proportion that others don’t have.”Rishi Sunak is under huge pressure from Tory centrists and right-wingers Despite the huge damage done by Mr Jenrick’s resignation, the PM had been warned that he faced an even more damaging rebellion – with the possible resignation of up to 10 moderate ministers – if he had tried to bypass the ECHR.Senior Tory moderate Damian Green, chair of the One Nation group – which boasts support from around 100 MPs – has warned Mr Sunak that he “should think twice before overriding both the ECHR and HRA”.A spokesman for the One Nation group said it welcomed the government’s decision to stick with “international commitments”, and taking legal advice on whether to support the bill.Despite the cautious backing of centrists, senior moderate Tobias Ellwood told Times Radio that he would not support the Rwanda bill if there is “any prospect” of breaking international laws. “We uphold international law. We don’t break it.”Mr Ellwood said the row over Rwanda was “ripping our party in half”. The Tory MP added: “If this infighting continues, it will not just cost us the next general election, it will see our party splinter into two between the centre right and the far right.”The new Sunak bill includes provisions to disapply relevant parts of the Human Rights Act so they cannot be factored into court decisions on deportation cases – but does not try to disapply the ECHR.However, the legislation will ensure UK ministers “retain the decision on whether or not to comply” with interim orders from the European Court of Human Rights – the Strasbourg body that oversees the ECHR.Former Tory attorney general Dominic Grieve told BBC Newsnight: “We are watching Tory splits between those MPs that believe in the rule of law and those Conservatives who do not.”The Tory right are also angry at the legislation still allows for individual legal challenges. Mr Heaton-Harris acknowledged that people faced with being sent on a one-way trip to Rwanda will still have some legal routes to challenge the decision.The right-wing Brexiteer Mark Francois said: “If under this legislation those people could continue to appeal and appeal in order to delay being put on a flight, what’s the point of the bill?” More