Markus Andrews

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailA Tory donor who funded Rishi Sunak’s private jet travel is being taken to court over allegations of unauthorised business deals that made his sister millions of pounds, it has been revealed.Entrepreneur Akhil Tripathi, who made his fortune inventing an anti-snoring device, has donated more than £150,000 to the Conservative party since 2021.He funded £38,500 worth of the prime minister’s travel to the Scottish and Welsh Tory conferences, on board an Embraer Legacy 500 private jet.Mr Tripathi is being taken to court in a civil case, according to the i. The entrepreneur is facing allegations over business dealings he carried out when he was chief executive of the company he founded to market his snoring device, Signifier Medical Technologies (SMT), it said.Court papers show he is facing allegations over payments of “tens of millions” to his sister.Investors claim he facilitated the sale of his sister’s stake in the company without telling the board or highlighting that the seller was his sister.Mr Tripathi, who attended a Downing Street reception at which Mr Sunak was present in April, denies failing to disclose that his sister sold her shares. He also reportedly claims he was not asked about his relationship throughout the sale’s due diligence process.Other claims include that Mr Tripathi sold SMT shares owned by a close friend, and that he more than doubled the salaries of two senior managers without the approval of the company’s board.The court documents also accuse the entrepreneur of failing to disclose a potential conflict of interest between himself and a “close connection”.Mr Tripathi has donated a total of £153,475 to the Conservative Party, Electoral Commission figures show.Mr Sunak is relying on a dwindling pool of mega-donors ahead of next year’s general election as support for the Conservative Party dries up.Recent Electoral Commission data revealed that the Tories received £15.4m in donations between July and September including a £10m bequest from the former boss of Sainsbury’s.Mr Sunak has previously faced transparency questions over donations from multimillionaire Mr Tripathi. The PM declared that the £38,500 cost of air travel was funded by Balderton Medical Consultants, which is based in a property ultimately owned by Mr Tripathi.The original entry for Mr Sunak’s declaration of the donation listed Mr Tripathi, but this was later changed to cite Balderton instead.A spokeswoman for Mr Tripathi told the i: “Mr Tripathi has made a number of donations to the Conservative Party in a personal capacity, including for the costs of air travel for the Prime Minister and colleagues on 28 April 2023.”Downing Street declined to comment. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailPayouts to passengers for rail delays hit record highs last month among some of the worst-performing rail operators, figures suggest.Between November last year and last month, successful delay-repay claims more than doubled at Avanti West Coast, rising from 45,900 to 104,700, according to data from watchdog the Office of Rail and Road (ORR).Three months ago, Avanti, which had been beset by poor performance, was handed a long-term contract renewal of up to nine years.The company had been ordered to develop a recovery plan aimed at addressing cancellations, which were largely attributed to drivers refusing to work paid overtime shifts.The number of delay-repay claims paid out by Great Western Railways (GWR) also more than doubled in that period, from 63,400 to 141,100.And at East Midlands Railway claims increased from 23,700 to 26,300 year on year, a rise of 11 per cent.Rail operators say most delays are not their fault, but are caused by infrastructure problems on the network.But last month all three private operators recorded their highest number of November delay-repay payouts – above pre-pandemic levels.Earlier this year, Avanti West Coast became the worst operator for train punctuality in a list that also included TransPennine Express, CrossCountry, East Midlands Railways and Great Western Railway.Between April and June, only 46.1 per cent of Avanti trains ran on time. By September, the company had improved and became only the second-worst performing operator.Avanti West Coast runs trains on the West Coast Main Line between London Euston and Glasgow Central, with branches to Birmingham, North Wales, Liverpool, Manchester and Edinburgh.Train reliability across the UK fell to a record low last year. On-the-day service cancellations rose to their highest level since records began in 2014, it was revealed, partly because of strikes.Figures from the regulator covering the final three months of last year showed that one train in 30 was cancelled on the day.Labour, which obtained the delay-repay figures, pledged to take rail franchises back into public ownership as they expire.A spokesperson for Avanti West Coast said: “We would like to apologise to customers who have experienced delays on our services. As the ORR’s figures show, the delay-repay scheme the industry has in place is working and making it easier than ever for customers to receive compensation when their train is delayed.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster email Albania’s parliament voted Thursday to lift the legal immunity of former Prime Minister Sali Berisha, who leads the opposition Democratic Party and is being probed for possible corruption.Opposition lawmakers inside the hall boycotted the vote and tried to disrupt the session by collecting chairs and flares, but security guards stopped them. Berisha didn’t take the floor to speak against the motion.The ruling Socialist Party holds 74 of the 140 seats in Albania’s national legislature, and 75 lawmakers agreed to grant a request from prosecutors to strip Berisha of his parliamentary immunity. Thursday’s vote clears prosecutors to seek a court’s permission to put Berisha under arrest or house arrest.With the opposition refusing to participate, there were no votes against the move or any abstentions.In October, prosecutors publicly accused Berisha of allegedly abusing his post to help his son-in-law, Jamarber Malltezi, privatize public land to build 17 apartment buildings. Prosecutors have yet to take the formal charges to the court and Berisha is still technically under investigation.Berisha, 79, and Malltezi, 52, both have proclaimed their innocence, alleging the case was a political move by the ruling Socialist Party of Prime Minister Edi Rama. Prosecutors have said that if Berisha is convicted, he faces a prison sentence of up to 12 years.Democratic Party supporters protested outside the parliament building Thursday with anti-government banners and “Down with dictatorship” chants. Berisha called on his supporters to join “a no-return battle” against the “authoritarian regime” of the Socialists.“That decision won’t destroy the opposition but will mobilize it, and under the motto ‘Today or never,’ it will respond to that regime,” Berisha told reporters after the vote.Berisha served as Albania’s prime minister from 2005-2013, and as president from 1992-1997. He was reelected as a lawmaker for the Democratic Party in the 2021 parliamentary elections.The United States government in May 2021 and the United Kingdom in July 2022 barred Berisha and close family members from entering their countries because of alleged involvement in corruption.Since the investigation into Berisha’s role in the land deal was revealed in October, opposition lawmakers have regularly disrupted sessions of parliament to protest the Socialists’ refusal to create commissions to investigate alleged cases of corruption involving Rama and other top government officials.The Socialists say the plans are not in line with constitutional requirements.The disruptions are 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 as part of the Balkan country’s path toward full membership in the bloc.___Follow Llazar Semini at https://x.com/lsemini More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailSajid Javid has for the first time revealed the full details of his extraordinary row with Boris Johnson and ex-No 10 adviser Dominic Cummings which saw him ousted as chancellor.The senior Tory lifted the lid on his bust-up with the then-prime minister in February 2020, when Mr Johnson demanded the chancellor sack all his Treasury advisers to stay in the job.Knowing Mr Johnson’s top adviser was the one pushing for senior Treasury staff to be sacked, the chancellor told the PM at a showdown meeting: “It’s either me or Cummings.”The PM chose Mr Cummings. Before storming out, Mr Javid told Mr Johnson: “That guy – he’s not going to be content until he burns the house down. He’s running rings around you.”The former chancellor shared the full details of the ruckus in the Crisis What Crisis? podcast with the Tory party’s former communications boss Andy Coulson.Mr Javid said infighting had left the Conservatives in a “very depressing” state. He also revealed the terrible scale of the racism he suffered growing up in the 1970s – which saw him attacked by skinheads and his parents’ shop vandalised.The former cabinet minister – home secretary under Theresa May before becoming chancellor under Mr Johnson – suggested then-PM was “taking his instructions” from Mr Cummings when demanding he sack six Treasury special advisers in February 2020.Johnson and then-chancellor Javid in 2019“I reacted immediately, I said, ‘I can’t do that, I’m not doing that… These are like some of our best people, you just want me to fire them?’,” Mr Javid said.“And then [Mr Johnson] said, “Saj, they’re only people. Don’t worry about it.”Bizarrely, Mr Javid was then given 15 minutes to change his mind as Mr Johnson marched out of the room. The former chancellor said No 10 officials came in to tell him: “This is all Cummings. Just do what he’s saying because Cummings will be gone soon anyway.”But Mr Javid said he “just couldn’t do it” despite being “begged” by Mr Johnson to change his mind, leading to his half-hearted demand for Mr Cummings’ exit and resignation the same day.The former chancellor later patched things up with Mr Johnson – after the Tory leader had fallen out with Mr Cummings – and re-joined government as health secretary after Matt Hancocks’s exit in the summer of 2021.He went on to play a key role in the PM’s downfall when he resigned on the same morning as Rishi Sunak. Though Mr Javid, who stood for the Tory leadership, insists his exit was not co-ordinated with the man who would eventually become PM.Mr Javid with Sunak and Johnson in September 2021 The former banker said Mr Johnson’s government was a “massive” missed opportunity, given the huge majority won in 2019, and blamed the former PM for “listening to the wrong people”.On the party’s current polling woes and internal squabbles on Rwanda and other major policies, Mr Javid said: “I find the whole situation very depressing really”, before offering a grim warning for the 2024 general election.”“We’re not helping ourselves with all this infighting, and the one thing I certainly learned during my 13, 14 years in parliament is that the public won’t elect a disunited party,” added the senior MP – who is standing down next year.Mr Javid also discussed the racism that blighted his upbringing in Bristol in the 1970s and 1980s, revealing that he was regularly abused and attacked by National Front skinheads on his way to school.“I would have to avoid them because the times that I didn’t avoid them I would get punched in the face, punched in the stomach, called P*** and all sorts of other things,” he said.His parents’ shop was regularly daubed with racist graffiti. “We would wake up in the morning, go down to the shop and someone would have sprayed ‘P*** bastard’ or something along the windows of the shop.”“And then my poor mother – my dad would be ranting and raving and be really upset – my mother would be the sort of practical one and actually get out detergent and other things and she would be scrubbing it.”He added: “I think things have improved a lot in our country since then. It’s by no means sort of perfect when it comes to race relations, but it doesn’t feel like that era anymore.”But Mr Javid suggested that his background was partly the reason senior people at “tired old” British banks turned him down for jobs at the end of 1980s.The senior Tory, who went to work for Chase Manhattan Bank, credited Margaret Thatcher with the so-called ‘Big Bang’ shake-up of the City which allowed US companies to play a bigger role.“For these businesses that you know, it was costly to be racist,” he said. “What really made money was getting the best talent in, regardless of their colour or their background. The American banks were much more meritocratic.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailCalls for Baroness Michelle Mone to be stripped of her peerage have intensified this week, following her admission in a recent interview that she lied to the media about her involvement in a company that supplied millions of pounds worth of PPE equipment to the government during the Covid pandemic.Leader of the opposition Sir Keir Starmer added significantly to the pressure, declaring: “I don’t think she should be in the Lords. I think the government should be held to account for this.”Meanwhile Rishi Sunak was more cautious: “The government takes these things incredibly seriously, which is why we’re pursuing legal action against the company concerned in these matters. That’s how seriously I take it and the government takes it.”Independent readers, however, were almost unanimous in their calls to remove Baroness Mone from the House of Lords when we asked for your opinions this week.Here’s what you had to say:‘Think about the bigger picture’Business is about who you know, not what you know a lot of the time in my experience and grabbing an opportunity whenever from whoever you can. Lying probably not a good idea in the scheme of things, but show me any business person that isn’t economic with truth when it suits, eh?Hindsight’s a wonderful thing and I wonder what else this government was supposed to do, given the circumstances where it turns out nobody knew what they were doing, took bad advice, ignored good advice all to end up with some disastrous mistakes.I just think folks need to step back, think about the bigger picture before making judgementsOWLDEGIT‘Morals of an alley cat’Why is it even questionable if she should be kicked out of the House of Lords? A proven liar, and a call to arms, really? She used an horrific situation for her and her family’s gain instead of doing good then lied throughout. Morals of an alley cat. Get her out!BJ4‘Hard-wired to be deceitful’Quite honestly, apart from a whacking donation to the Tories, I’ve no idea why Cameron elevated her to the Lord’s in the first place. Her contributions to the House averaged about one a year and she’s done little to contribute to anything except for her self-promotion and enrichment. Her morality compass is broken (if it ever existed – she apparently fessed up to lying on CV to get her first job). She has brought the House of Lords into serious dis-repute and she has repeatedly told lies to protect the secrecy of her offshore trust arrangements and wealth. She may well be excellent at flogging knickers and bras but I rather think she’s hard-wired to be deceitful, unethical, greedy and immoral.TheSnowQueen‘Integrity, honour and respect’I guess that depends on whether or not the HoL represents an ideological example of what the common person should be aspiring to and looking at for leadership.With members like Mone the example is not one of integrity, honour and respect.Freedom‘She should return the £60m’Yes, she should be thrown out. It is morally incorrect to knowingly make a profit out of the people. She should return the £60m and also the Medpro contract made void in regards to equipment not fit for purpose. All monies to be paid back to us, the tax payer.MrKnowitall‘She lied’“.. peer insists she ‘can’t see’ what was wrong with her actions “Just like Boris who still believes he has done nothing wrong in Partygate.Boris got kicked out of the HoC because he lied and in that respect Baroness Mone also should be kicked out of the HoL because she lied.Unless, of course, there is the ‘one rule to them, one rule to us’ clause being appliedRasputin007‘An institution which is long overdue for reform’She would remain Baroness Mone, even if barred from the House of Lords. It would take an act of parliament to remove this title and quite frankly barring her is no punishment. Her appearances and voting record in the House of Lords have been minimal. The English way is to hope these dodgy people just go away and stay out of the public eye. Lord Archer? Lady Porter? All distinctly unworthy recipients of high honours and both permanently absent from the House of Lords. Do we really want people like Michelle Mone determining which laws are passed in this country ? Probably not.The bigger question is what is the House of Lords for, apart from ennobling wealthy individuals who give money to political parties ? Its an institution which is long overdue for reform. Michelle Mone merely a symptom of this.Rantovani‘A huge profit from the public purse’If only Mone’s morals were as uplifting as the bras she made her money from. While public servants such as health workers and many others gave themselves selflessly in response to the COVID crisis, she and her husband took the opportunity of a huge profit from the public purse. Should she be in the House of Lords? ABSOLUTELY NOT!TheDisillusionedMasses‘Why lie?’She is a Peer of the Realm and in the House overseeing the laws made and enforced in the UK on all of us she should have already been removed.‘I told them what I had done’ – does not excuse her actions. It does implicate those that knew the details – they too should be brought to book.She admitted she lied about her involvement – if this were totally innocent why lie? She even went further by making threats of legal action against those questioning that lie.An apology after being caught, denying involvement and threatening legal action is not an apology it’s a hollow rouse to deflect and hardly a convincing sign of contrition. An apology that was followed by a statement that she did nothing wrong!ArcticFox‘Collective snouts in the trough’She absolutely should go, but then on the same token Sunak should go for the multiple times he’s given contracts to companies that happen to benefit his wife’s investments. Pretty much everyone else who used the “VIP Lane” needs some forensic accounting work on them as well (Hancock especially.)And if we’re going down this route people like Streeting taking cash from American private health companies should block him from running the NHS due to a clear conflict of interest.Will any of this happen? Of course not, because they’re all looking out for each other as usual so they can keep their collective snouts in the trough.Mike‘Stripped of their titles’She and the rest of the dodgy peers involved in corrupt activities need to be stripped of their titles even if it takes an act of Parliament. The same should apply to corrupt MPs, a simple and pointless apology in the Commons is not a punishment or deterrent.DisillusionedSome of the questions and answers have been edited for this article. You can read the full discussion in the comments section of the original article.The conversation isn’t over – there’s still time to have your say. If you want to share your opinion then add it in the comments of this story.All you have to do is sign up, submit your question and register your details – then you can then take part in the discussion. You can also sign up by clicking ‘log in’ on the top right-hand corner of the screen.Make sure you adhere to our community guidelines, which can be found here. For a full guide on how to comment click here. More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailThe government has performed a partial climbdown on new visa rules critics claimed would tear couples and families apart. The move was one of a raft of measures designed to slash the number of immigrants by 300,000 a year. But ministers have postponed plans to allow only those earning £38,700 or above to bring their spouses to the UK. Instead, the threshold will still rise sharply in the spring, but to a lower figure of £29,000. The Liberal Democrats, who had dubbed the original plans the “family breakup bill”, accused the government of a “half thought through idea”. But Rishi Sunak faced a backlash from Tory MPs who called the move “deeply disappointing”. And a former Tory minister suggested No 10’s plans had been vetoed by the Treasury. Ex-health minister Lord Bethell said: “My children aren’t getting everything they asked for this [Christmas]. Seems it’s the same in Downing Street.” The crackdown was part of plans to cut net migration after it soared to nearly three-quarters of a million in 2022.Home Office minister Lord Sharpe of Epsom confirmed in answer to a written parliamentary question that the threshold would be raised in the spring to £29,000. James Cleverly insists net migration to the UK will drop The current level is £18,600, which means 75 per cent of the UK’s workers meet the requirement. If it was raised to £38,700 just 30 per cent would, Lord Sharpe also confirmed. No date was given for when the threshold would rise beyond £29,000. James Cleverly, the home secretary, insisted the Home Office would still reduce net legal migration by 300,000 a year, saying the British people were “rightly, frustrated and want to see action”.But Tory MP Jonathan Gullis said: “This decision is deeply disappointing and undermines our efforts [to control migration].”Yvette Cooper MP, the shadow home secretary, said: “This is more evidence of Tory government chaos on immigration and the economy.“On their watch, net migration has trebled as skills shortages have got worse and worse and they still have no proper plan to link the immigration system to training or workforce planning. They failed to consult anyone on their new proposals and took no account of the impact of steep spousal visa changes on families next year, so it’s no surprise they are now rowing back in a rush.”Ms Cooper said the government should seek advice on detailed policy changes from the migration advisory committee – experts on both immigration and the labour market.Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson Alistair Carmichael said: “You have to wonder who is in charge at the Home Office, or if anyone is. It was clear to everyone else that the raising of the earnings threshold was unworkable. This was yet another half thought through idea to placate the hardliners on their own back benches.“James Cleverly needs to put down the spade and stop digging. Decisions like this should be made by experts and politicians working together. He should also publish the advice from the Treasury and OBR [Office for Budget Responsibility] about the impact that his package of changes will have on the economy.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailRishi Sunak’s government has vowed to ban Premier League clubs from joining the European Super League, as the breakaway venture attempts a relaunch.The European Court of Justice ruled that Uefa and Fifa acted unlawfully by stopping the league – opening up fresh efforts by A22 Sports to kickstart the controversial project.The “big six” English clubs sparked outrage from their fans and opposition from Boris Johnson’s government in 2021 when they secretly agreed to play in the new league.Responding to Thursday’s bombshell court ruling, the Sunak government made clear that forthcoming legislation, the Football Governance Bill, would be used to block British clubs from joining any new league.A spokesperson for the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) said the previous attempt to create a breakaway league was a “defining moment in English football and was universally condemned by fans, clubs and the government”.They said: “We took decisive action at the time by triggering the fan-led review of football governance, which called for the creation of a new independent regulator for English football.”The DCMS statement added: “We will shortly be bringing forward legislation that makes this a reality, and will stop clubs from joining any similar breakaway competitions in the future.”The April 2021 attempt to launch the ESL saw street protests by angry supporters Six Premier League clubs had signed up to the ESL plans – Liverpool, Manchester United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur – creating howls of outrage across the football world.A review led by former sports minister Tracey Crouch saw the government push forward plans for a new football regulator, with new legal powers to stop clubs from quitting current UK leagues to play in breakaway projects.When announced in April 2021, Mr Johnson pounced upon the unpopularity of the European Super League with fans and vowed to block the big English clubs from joining. The then PM condemned the idea as a “cartel” and said it was “against the basic principles of competition”.Although the ESL continues to be supported prominently by Real Madrid and Barcelona, England’s big six – chastened by the reaction two years ago – are believed to have gone cold on the plan.Manchester United said on Thursday that they remain “fully committed” to working within Premier League and Uefa structures. And the Premier League said it “continues to reject any concept” of a European Super League.‘Big six’ clubs were condemned for initial attempt to join the breakaway league England’s top flight division said it remains committed to the “clear principles of open competition” and said supporters “have time and again made clear their opposition to a “breakaway” competition”.The original plan was condemned for its attempt to attend fair competition by sealing off the elite clubs from the rest in a bid to protect lucrative TV deals.But the revamped plan set out by ESL’s backers A22 on Thursday proposed a wider system of 64 men’s clubs which would involve promotion and regulation through three tiers. A planned two-tier women’s league would involve 32 clubs.Following the landmark court ruling, the Football Supporters’ Association condemned what it called the “zombie” project. “There is no place for an ill-conceived breakaway super league … While the corpse might continue to twitch in the European courts, no English side will be joining.”Senior Conservative MP Dame Caroline Dinenage – chair of the culture, media and sport select committee – warned the big six clubs not to engage with the ESL’s fresh push to get off the ground.“The announcement of the European Super League in 2021 prioritised finances over fans, and any revival of it isn’t in the interests of English football,” she said.Backing the government’s plan to block clubs from joining, she added: “I hope that English clubs will have learnt from the reaction in 2021, and will be focused on fan engagement and the much-needed football governance reforms that the government has promised.” More

Sign up for the View from Westminster email for expert analysis straight to your inboxGet our free View from Westminster emailJeremy Hunt has sought to give Tory MPs an early Christmas present with another hint he could cut taxes ahead of a general election next year.The chancellor suggested he could have more money to play with as the government pays less interest on its debt. Mr Hunt said ministers would “cut the tax burden if we are able to” in an interview with Bloomberg Television. However, he cautioned he would not do anything that risked fuelling inflation again. Mr Hunt is under intense pressure from MPs in his own party to cut taxes as they scramble to try to save their jobs. With Labour around 20 points ahead in the polls, some Conservatives feel the move is one of the few ways they can avoid wipeout at the election. Mr Hunt said: “If debt interest payments go down then potentially that gives me more headroom and I could use that in lots of different ways but I would never use it in a way that would compromise the battle against inflation.” “We would like to bring down the tax burden in a way that is responsible.”Mr Hunt announced what he said was the largest series of tax cutting measures since the 1980s in the autumn statement. But he came under fire when it emerged the overall tax burden was still on course to hit a post-war high. His latest comments on tax come a day after the government received an end of year boost as official figures showed the rate of inflation has fallen further than expected. But there was also bad news, as statistics revealed government borrowing was higher than forecast in November. Mr Hunt gave the interview as he struck a post-Brexit banking deal with Switzerland aimed at easing UK finance firms’ access to the country’s market and vice versa.It come as the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) urged Mr Sunak and Mr Hunt to consider a range of side and supplementary deals with the EU to ease ongoing trade friction.Almost two-thirds of UK exporters say selling to the EU has become even harder in the past year, according to the BCC’s latest Brexit report.The leading business group called for a series of agreements with Brussels – on carbon taxes, VAT arrangements and food checks – to soften the impact of Boris Johnson’s trade deal. More