UK Politics

Another private jet linked to Russian oligarchs has been grounded at a UK airport, under efforts to sanction allies of Vladimir Putin.A Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) order has been issued to prevent the aircraft from taking off from London Luton Airport, the Department for Transport (DfT) said.“We won’t stand by and watch those who’ve made millions through Putin’s patronage live their lives in peace as innocent blood is shed,” said Grant Shapps, the transport secretary.The aircraft will remain at Luton airport while officials investigate further whether it falls under legislation banning all aircraft connected with Russia, following its invasion of Ukraine.The DfT – which has already detained one private helicopter belonging to HeliCo Group LLC and two private jets – said it would not be commenting on the aircraft’s ownership while it investigates.The two jets belong to Eugene Shvidler, a sanctioned billionaire business associate of Roman Abramovich, who has been sanctioned as he sells Chelsea Football Club.Ministers are stepping up their targeting of the UK assets of oligarchs, leading to the seizure of the first superyacht in British waters earlier this week.Significantly, the £38m yacht, named Phi, is owned by a Russian businessman who is understood not to be sanctioned, but has “close connections” to Putin, Mr Shapps said.The Foreign Office is exploring extending sanctions to the staff and crew who work on yachts or planes owned by Russian oligarchs, to make it harder for them to be maintained.The move would also restrict the ability of oligarchs to find staff willing to sail or fly their assets out of the UK jurisdiction.Two superyachts linked to Mr Abramovich have docked in Turkey, beyond the reach of UK and EU sanctions – but, if it could be proven that UK firms were providing assistance, they could be targeted.The Foreign Office has also said sanctions are being extended to cover illegal activity not just in Crimea but in the Russian-controlled territories of Donetsk and Luhansk.However, ministers were embarrassed by an admission that at least eight Russian oligarchs on the UK sanctions list over their links to Putin were granted “golden visas” to live in Britain.The individuals were granted the right to live in the UK after promising to invest at least £2m under the controversial tier 1 investor visa scheme.The eight were not named and the Home Office refused to provide any further details.Liz Truss, the foreign secretary, said: “We will continue to ramp up the pressure so long as Russian troops are in Ukraine, targeting not only the businesses of oligarchs but also their assets and international lifestyles.” More

A cabinet minister has admitted a £200 payment to help households with soaring energy bills is “a loan” – after Rishi Sunak repeatedly rejected the claim.Controversy is growing over the October measure – requiring repayments of £40 a year over the following five years – because those bills will land as fuel costs are expected to keep rising sharply.This week, the chancellor rejected criticism that the “heat now, pay later” scheme is storing up problems for the future, telling MPs: “It is not debt. It is not a loan.”But when it was put to Brandon Lewis, the Northern Ireland Secretary, that the £200 is “a loan let’s remember”, he briefly replied: “Yes” – before adding: “No, I said that.”The End Fuel Poverty Coalition has warned that vulnerable families will be pushed further into debt by the measure, also criticising the decision to make it compulsory.Labour has branded it “a scam”, arguing around one million people who will not receive it – first time buyers, separated couples, students and care leavers – will still be liable for the future charges.“There’s a million people who are not going to get the £200, but they still have to pay the money back,” said Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor.But, under fire at the Commons Treasury committee on Monday, Mr Sunak denied he is forcing people to take on more debt, saying: “It is wrong to worry people that that is what is happening, because it is clearly not.”The chancellor insisted: “It is not debt. It is not a loan. There is no interest on it. No one’s credit rating is impacted.”He added: “Describing it as a loan is wrong. It is spreading the impact of a price increase over five years rather than having to deal with it all in one go at the beginning. I think that is a good thing.”Mr Lewis stumbled as he defended not giving families more help with the cost of living crisis, telling BBC Radio 4: “We’re already at record levels of borrowing since the Second World War.”Analysts have warned that the UK is heading for the worst plunge in living standards since the 1950s and an explosion in poverty that will push 500,000 more children below the breadline.Pensions and benefits are going up by only 3.1 per cent this month – yet inflation is predicted to hit 8 or 9 per cent later this year.But Mr Lewis argued the government is ‘putting £22bn in people’s pockets”, pointing to a higher minimum wage and the higher National Insurance threshold, from June.“We’ve got to recognise there is massive international pressure as we come out of Covid in terms of energy prices. Obviously the war in Ukraine is having an acute pressure at the moment,” he said. More

The Home Office has shut down part of the UK’s visa and immigration system in order to divert resources to its ”chaotic“ and bureaucratic scheme for Ukraine refugees.Priority and super-priority visas for study, work and family purposes from countries other than Ukraine have been temporarily closed to applicants, with standard visas also experiencing delays.Most European countries have waived visas and offered open access for Ukrainians fleeing the Russian invasion – but the UK is still insisting they fill in lengthy forms and undergo copious visa checks.Yet the Home Office is struggling to process its own bureaucracy, with just 2,700 visas issued as of this week for Ukrainians under the Home for Ukraine scheme despite 28,000 applications having been made. Now The Independent has learned that the government has pulled staff out of other immigration functions and closed some entirely in order to divert resources to deal with its overcomplicated Ukraine programme.The temporary shutdown of priority visas will make it difficult for people to come to the UK for last-minute purposes, with waits on standard visas expected to be at least six weeks. A Home Office minister this week apologised to people trying to visit the UK “for any inconvenience” the policy would cause.“UK Visas and Immigration [UKVI] is currently prioritising applications made under the Ukraine Family Scheme, following its launch and in response to the humanitarian crisis arising from the invasion of Ukraine,” immigration minister Kevin Foster said in a written parliamentary answer.“As a result, UKVI have temporarily suspended paid for priority and super priority services for new study, work, and family applications.“Customers with standard applications in study, work, and family routes may experience some delays in the processing of their application. We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause.”Immigration experts warned that the government’s approach to the Ukraine crisis was clearly unsuitable for the task at hand, and suggested the UK should follow Europe’s lead in waiving visas. “Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the only appropriate response has been and remains to waive visas,” Zoe Bantleman, legal director of the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association, told The Independent.“From the outset, we, along with other specialist organisations, have called for the waiving of all red tape, of the visa application process, and of enrolment of biometrics overseas. “The UK’s current response is wholly inadequate in comparison to the practical, responsible, and humane approaches taken by other European countries, including Ireland, to provide efficient and effective safe routes. The level of bureaucracy is clearly unsuitable to meet the demands of this situation.”She added: “The answer is not to suspend priority processing for other applications, or rush staff to enrol biometrics.”Ms Bantleman said the change could be easily made by deleting the word ‘Ukraine’ from the list of nationalities required to have visitor clearance to enter the UK.“The UK would stand with Ukraine, and treat Ukrainians in the same way as it treats nationals of nearly 100 other countries,” she said.“Once they arrive at the border, biometrics of Ukrainians could be taken and they could be granted leave outside the rules and a full application could be processed once they are safely in the UK, as was done for residents of Hong Kong.”As of 29 March, 22,800 visas have been issued under the Ukraine Family Scheme out of 31,200 applications, with the Homes for Ukraine scheme issuing 2,700 visas out of 28,300 applications. In total 59,500 applications have been made across both schemes, with around 25,500 visas issued – meaning less than half of applicants have been approved.The government has said it hopes to process 15,000 applications a week within the next few weeks in a bid to clear the backlog.Satbir Singh, chief executive of the Joint Committee for the Welfare of Immigrants (JCWI) said: “The British public clearly want to see refugees supported and protected, but this government seem totally unable to match that public compassion with action. “Their characteristically chaotic and hostile Home Office is failing Ukrainians, just as it has failed Afghans, and so many fleeing danger before them.“When you’re running for your life, you pack your bags at a moment’s notice, you leave your home in the middle of the night. You’re not thinking about loading mortgage contracts or marriage certificates into the family car – you can’t wait months and months for a visa.“Instead of recognising that reality, and doing all they can to accommodate people, this government is pushing an anti-refugee bill through parliament which will criminalise and turn away people fleeing conflict. We can’t let government go ahead with these disastrous plans – we need an asylum system that welcomes Ukrainians and other refugees, however they’ve had to flee.”Under the Homes for Ukraine scheme individuals, charities, community groups, and businesses are allowed to sponsor visas for refugees coming from Ukraine as long as they provide them with a rent-free place to stay. More than 150,000 households have offered accommodation and hosts get £350 a month tax-free for opening their homes. The family scheme meanwhile allows Ukrainians to join certain family members already living in the UK.The Independent has a proud history of campaigning for the rights of the most vulnerable, and we first ran our Refugees Welcome campaign during the war in Syria in 2015. Now, as we renew our campaign and launch this petition in the wake of the unfolding Ukrainian crisis, we are calling on the government to go further and faster to ensure help is delivered. To find out more about our Refugees Welcome campaign, click here. To sign the petition click here. If you would like to donate then please click here for our GoFundMe page More

Planning rules for onshore wind farms could be eased in next week’s government strategy paper on the UK’s future energy supply, after Boris Johnson expressed frustration at the lengthy delays faced by projects.The prime minister is understood to have been “horrified” after being told by industry figures at a meeting on Thursday that onshore wind turbines could be erected in a day but need as long as 10 years to get planning approval.Industry sources present at the meeting told The Independent that the PM made no commitments on the issue but their hopes for change were buoyed by his evident enthusiasm for wind power and desire to find solutions which could deliver a swift boost to homegrown energy. He did not rule any sources in or out, they said.Business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng is pushing for regulations in England to be relaxed, which give so much weight to local opposition as to act as an effective moratorium on development since their introduction in 2015.He shares the belief of the UK renewables industry that onshore wind offers the quickest and cheapest route to enabling Britain to rein in skyrocketing energy bills, escape reliance on Russian oil and gas and hit net-zero targets. He has drafted targets to increase onshore wind capacity from 15 to 30 GW, alongside hikes from 14 to 50GW in solar energy, 11 to 50GW from offshore wind and 7 to 16GW from nuclear. Thousands more onshore wind turbines would be required to meet that target.Without change, windfarm developments over the coming decades will be confined to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, where planning rules are less restrictive. Sticking with existing planning regulations would also prevent the upgrade of the earliest English wind farms in areas like Cornwall, dating back to the 1990s, which could generate four to five times as much power if refitted with modern turbines.Trade body RenewableUK’s chief executive Dan McGrail told The Independent: “Onshore wind is the UK’s cheapest source of new power, so it has a crucial role to play in reducing electricity bills, because we can build shovel-ready projects faster than any other source of energy. “Most of these will be in Scotland and Wales where the wind speeds are highest, but we also have a great opportunity to enable new onshore wind projects to go ahead in parts of England where there’s public support. “This will boost the UK’s energy security by reducing our reliance on volatile international gas prices which are hurting consumers. We’re working closely with government to maximise our renewable energy capacity across a range of clean technologies, creating tens of thousands of jobs, attracting billions in investment and providing practical solutions to climate change so that we can reach net zero as quickly as possible.”  Mr Johnson’s vocal support for offshore wind in evidence to MPs on Wednesday fuelled concerns that he was siding with ministers, including chief whip Chris Heaton-Harris and Brexit minister Jacob Rees-Mogg, who regard the erection of turbines in the English shires as politically unacceptable.But after his meeting with industry leaders on Thursday, sources said there was now a “working assumption” that onshore will feature in the new strategy.Downing Street said that the PM told the meeting he had an “insatiable desire to further maximise supply” of wind-generated power and discussed what more could be done to ensure that onshore arrays with local support can be “built in good time”.It is understood that final decisions remain to be made on how high to set the bar for local opposition to block a project, and what incentives – such as discounted or free power – can be offered to encourage communities to accept developments.At the heart of the long-delayed strategy – initially promised “in a few days” by the PM a month ago – will be a dramatic increase in nuclear power and further investment in offshore wind.Mr Johnson is understood to want 25 per cent of the country’s energy provided by nuclear by 2050, and has said that new-style mini-reactors could be in place by the end of this decade.But renewable energy providers are lobbying him to use the opportunity to clear away policy blockages which stand in the way of a speedy expansion of alternative green power sources.The Association for Renewable Energy and Clean Technology (REA) said that measures to ease connection to the electricity grid for green power suppliers and the introduction of industrial fuel switching tariffs could see an explosion in projects over the next two years.They are calling for annual auctions for energy supply contracts to be simplified and made six-monthly to enable the rapid implementation of small-scale green projects.Around 600 onshore wind and solar projects across the UK have planning permission in place and could be up and running within 18 months if contracts are made available – enough to entirely replace Britain’s consumption of oil from Russia.And around 1m hectares of warehouse roof surface could be covered with solar panels with changes to support mechanisms to guarantee a price for the electricity generated over the longer term.“The government must be bold with their energy security strategy,” said REA chief executive Dr Nina Skorupska.“This is a crucial moment – over the coming months the UK must rapidly move away from fossil fuels onto renewables otherwise we could continue to suffer from volatile energy prices.“Our sector is clear: we stand ready for a mass rollout of small, medium and large-scale renewable developments if the government are proactive in removing barriers and providing other catalysts. We could more than double the number of planned projects in the next two years and the number of jobs created would also increase by around two-thirds – the government must seize these immense opportunities.”New polling suggests that ministers’ fear of a “Nimby” reaction to windfarm developments may be overblown.An overwhelming 72 per cent said they would support new wind farms in their local area if the development was coupled with a guarantee of cheap or free energy, in a survey by Redfield and Wilton Strategies for Politico Playbook.By contrast, just 38 per cent said they would back a nuclear power station near their home under the same conditions.More than half (52 per cent) said they would support more permits for oil and gas exploration in the North Sea.But government minister Kit Malthouse made clear that offshore wind will continue to be favoured ahead of onshore in the new strategy, telling Times Radio: “We’ve got very extensive, if not massive, offshore wind developments coming on track at the moment.“Onshore, I think it’s fair to say that we think there’s less possibility, not least because we are anxious to protect much of our countryside, where people feel strongly that the landscape should be protected, but we have huge capacity coming on stream offshore and we should pursue that as hard and as fast as we can.” More

Culture secretary Nadine Dorries has gone ahead with the appointment of the government’s favoured candidate to run the UK’s charity watchdog, despite a parliamentary committee refusing to endorse the choice.In a report published on Thursday, the Commons Culture Committee blasted the government’s selection process for the new chair of the Charity Commission and said the choice of barrister Orlando Fraser was “unimaginative”.Mr Fraser’s appointment followed farcical events in December, when the government’s preferred candidate Martin Thomas – reported to be a long-time friend of Boris Johnson – resigned after just a week in the job over allegations of inappropriate behaviour in a previous post.Withholding its approval for Mr Fraser’s appointment, the cross-party Culture Committee said in its report that Ms Dorries should have initiated an entirely new selection process at that point, rather than picking another candidate from the existing shortlist.The “slapdash” failure to rerun the process raised “serious concerns” about the selection process and the lack of diversity in the shortlist, the committee said.Following Ms Dorries’ decision to press ahead with the appointment, the committee’s Conservative chair Julian Knight told The Independent: “Our point still stands.“Although Orlando seems to be a perfectly capable candidate in many respects, we are not confident that he is the best candidate that could have been put before us, due to the flaws in the process.”Mr Knight said that the “fiasco” of Mr Thomas’s brief stint at the helm of the commission should have jolted Ms Dorries’ department into widening its search for a better candidate from a more diverse field.Instead, the Culture Department had “squandered its second chance”, he said, adding: “Unless it changes tack, trust in the process will continue to be damaged and we risk missing out on getting the most qualified people from all backgrounds for these very important jobs.”Mr Fraser, who takes up his three-year appointment on 25 April, is a commercial barrister who was appointed QC in 2014.He served on the board of the Charity Commission from 2013 to 2017 and has also worked on the Civil Justice Council and the National Council for Voluntary Organisations’ Advisory Council.His new role comes with a £62,500 salary for “up to” two and a half days a week.Ms Dorries also announced the appointment of former BBC chair Michael Grade to head broadcasting and telecoms regulator Ofcom on a £142,500 annual salary for 3 days’ work a week, despite the committee’s concerns at his lack of knowledge of the social media platforms he will have to oversee.After Lord Grade admitted in his pre-appointment hearing this week that he does not use social media, the committee backed his candidacy but warned he would need “support and advice” to keep him up to speed with the online world.The appointment process for the job was delayed for months after Mr Johnson’s first choice, former Daily Mail editor Paul Dacre, was first rejected by a recruitment panel and then withdrew from a rerun selection. More

The purchase of the UK’s biggest microchip producer by a Chinese-controlled company has been cleared to go ahead by a review which found no reason for ministers to intervene on national security grounds.The final decision on the £63m takeover of Newport Wafer Fab by Nexperia rests with business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng, who has not yet given his approval. Sources told The Independent he might still use his powers under the National Security and Investment Act to block the sale.But the development has sparked alarm among senior Conservative MPs who fear Beijing being handed control of strategic national assets.The review by national security adviser Stephen Lovegrove was ordered by Boris Johnson last year after concerns were raised over the sale of the Welsh semiconductor manufacturer, whose chips are an essential component of electronic devices.News of the takeover by Nexperia, a Dutch subsidiary of the Chinese technology company Wingtech, sparked calls for Kwarteng to intervene last spring.The former head of the National Cyber Security Centre, Ciaran Martin, said the takeover presented a bigger threat to the UK than Huawei’s involvement in 5G.And former Australian PM Tony Abbott, who is a UK government trade adviser, said that the sale “would not go ahead were it happening in Australia”.An initial review by the deputy national security adviser found last year that there was no case for intervention, as Newport Wafer Fab uses technology already available to China.But Lovegrove was asked to conduct a further assessment of whether the sale should be blocked under the National Security and Investment Act , which last year introduced new powers for ministers to intervene in foreign takeovers of companies central to the national interest.His decision that there is no need to act dismayed MPs concerned about increasing Chinese control of UK assets.Tom Tugendhat, the chair of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, told the Politico website: “It’s not clear why we haven’t used our new powers under the National Security and Investment Act to fully review the takeover of one of our leading compound semiconductor companies.“This is an area where China is sinking billions to compete. The government has no clear strategy to protect what’s left of our semiconductor industry.”And former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith said the decision was “ridiculous.”“Kwasi Kwarteng needs to stand up for access to key technologies in the West which China is determined to get control over,” he said.“If the government goes down this road, it will become yet another step in the pathetic process of appeasing China who right now is supporting Russia and plans to pose a direct and deliberate threat to the West’s access to microchips and other key components for electronic equipment.”A government spokesperson said: “The government is considering the case and no decisions have been made.” More

The parent company of P&O Ferries is receiving £550m from the shrunken UK aid budget to expand ports in Africa despite its on-the-spot sacking of 800 workers, sparking fresh anger in parliament.MPs are demanding an explanation for the huge funding sum – accusing the government of putting commercial investments ahead of “tackling extreme poverty”, as many other aid projects are axed.It is also an “inappropriate” use of aid cash because DP World, the Dubai-based parent firm, could find a private partner to develop the ports, the chair of the Commons international development committee is alleging.“It pains me to think of what more that £500m could achieve for global health, women’s education or tackling extreme poverty,” Sarah Champion said.Navendu Mishra, a committee member, attacked the sum being “pumped into a disreputable employer” when the 800 workers were “treated in a disgraceful way”.In the wake of the P&O scandal, ministers pledged to review all DP World contracts, but the committee was told it was too late to stop the £550m being handed over.Furthermore, the head of the finance arm behind a growing slice of UK aid spending vowed to make the same investment again, regardless of the P&O mass sackings, hailing its “enormous” potential.The controversy comes after the government admitted it cannot prosecute P&O, despite its confession that it deliberately broke UK law and despite Boris Johnson vowing the firm would be “taken to court”.It also lifts the lid on the activities of the aid finance arm, called CDC Group, which has been accused previously of backing “projects with only the most tenuous relation to poverty reduction”.A coalition of charities has attacked its looming name change to British International Investment (BII), arguing it lays bare a new focus “solely on private sector investment and profit making”.“Increased funding for BII will lead to damaging reductions in other grant-based areas of UK aid spending, already cut by over £4bn this year,” said a protest letter signed by Christian Aid and Global Justice Now.CDC Group is taking a minority stake in a $1.7bn (£1.29bn) joint venture with DP World, investing an initial $320m and a further $400m into the ports in Egypt, Senegal and Somaliland – worth £550m in total.Even as the aid budget shrinks, the group’s share of it has risen to around £780m, as part of a shift to building “economic partnerships”, the foreign secretary Liz Truss has said.Ms Champion criticised the funding for ports expansion because DP World could “find other investors”, adding: “Our aid should be used as a last resort.“The UK government is condemning the actions of DP World whilst its development finance arm is using hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money to support a joint venture with them.“It needs to send a clear and consistent message that these sorts of employment practices are unacceptable – and businesses that use them certainly will not be supported wherever they operate in the world.”But a defiant Nick O’Donohoe, CDC’s chief executive – asked if the group would make the same investment, with the knowledge of P&O’s sackings – told the committee: “Yes.”Calling the benefits “enormous”, he said: “The impact case is an overwhelming one here, the difference that this will make to people’s lives in these countries.”Mr O’Donohoe argued it would have been “very difficult” for the firm to find other private cash, adding: “There are not a lot of commercial investors who are prepared to invest in Somaliland.”And he insisted DP World must follow international social and environmental standards set by the World Bank, telling the MPs: “They are contractually obliged to follow that.”But, sitting alongside him, Caroline Read, the Foreign Office’s director of economic cooperation, was unable to spell out how the firm would be held to account.Asked how anyone could “believe what DP World said when they are quite comfortable to break British law”, she admitted the government could only “assume they will live up to those standards”.Ministers have also refused to stop the firm running the London Gateway freeport – an investment described as “exciting” by transport secretary Grant Shapps when he met DP World chiefs in Dubai late last year. More