UK Politics

Scotland Yard will be revealing the number of government staff fined for having attended lockdown-busting parties, civil servants have reportedly been told.The reasons for each of the decisions will be given by the Metropolitan Police, but the identity of the individuals who will receive the fixed penalty notices (FPNs) will not be revealed, according to The Telegraph.The newspaper has reported that it has seen a copy of a question and answer sheet sent to government officials caught up in the police inquiry that was launched amid a separate investigation into ‘Partygate’ by senior civil servant Sue Gray.The questionnaire stresses that the taxpayer will not pay for the fines, and that the penalties will be paid for out of the individuals’ own pockets.Government staff facing allegations of attending lockdown-breaking parties are told to talk to their supervisors if they need time off to deal with their situation, the newspaper reported.The report adds that the question and answer sheet says: “The MPS [Metropolitan Police Service] approach during the pandemic has been to confirm the number of FPNs issued at particular events and to explain what those FPNs were issued for.”The police force is expected to reveal how many people will be fined, if any, for attending the 12 events it is investigating, which took place in government buildings as well as PM Boris Johnson’s Downing Street garden.In response to allegations of a party held in his flat on 13 November 2020, the prime minister has denied that there was a party that day. It has been alleged that his wife Carrie Johnson and advisers had gathered in the flat after Dominic Cummings, who was Mr Johnson’s senior adviser, quit. If Mr Johnson is fined for breaking lockdown rules, it could trigger a bigger push to oust him as PM after a number of Tory MPs have voiced their concerns, and one even defected to Labour, over the ‘Partygate’ scandal.Mr Johnson has refused to say that he would resign if he is fined, and has hired a private lawyer to help him respond to the police questionnaire issued to him last week.For other events that he has been pictured at, he has insisted that they were work rather than social events and is expected to deny any wrongdoing to the police.No 10 has said that his official response to the Met would remain private. More

Boris Johnson and Joe Biden have warned any Russian invasion of Ukraine would result in a “protracted crisis” for the Kremlin with a “significant package” of sanctions.During a call on Monday evening, the two leaders agreed, however, that a “crucial window” remained for diplomatic talks – just hours after the prime minister urged Vladimir Putin to step back from the “edge of a precipice”.“The leaders emphasised that any further incursion into Ukraine would result in a protracted crisis for Russia, with far reaching damage for both Russia and the world,” a No 10 spokesperson said.Downing Street said Mr Johnson and the US president “agreed that western allies must remain united in the face of Russian threats, including imposing a significant package of sanctions should Russian aggression escalate”.The spokesperson added: “They also reiterated the need for European countries to reduce their dependence on Russian gas, a move which, more than any other, would strike at the heart of Russia’s strategic interests”.“The prime minister and president Biden agreed to remain in close contact as the situation evolves.”The remarks follow the prime minister’s earlier warning that a Russian invasion of the Eastern European country could come within the “next 48 hours”.Mr Johnson, who cut short an official visit to Cumbria in order to return to No 10, received a security briefing from intelligence chiefs on Monday and will chair an emergency Cobra meeting on Tuesday as the crisis threatens stability in Europe.Ahead of his call with the US president, the prime minister stressed the evidence was “pretty clear” that the Kremlin was planning for an invasion, with an estimated 130,000 Russian troops massing on the Ukrainian border.“This is a very, very dangerous, difficult situation, we are on the edge of a precipice but there is still time for President [Vladimir] Putin to step back,” he insisted.Mr Johnson called for more dialogue and urged Russia to avoid a “disastrous” invasion, and said Mr Putin needed to understand the economic and political consequences of an incursion.Asked whether an invasion could be hours or days away, he replied: “The signs are from president [Joe] Biden they are at least planning for something that could take place as early as the next 48 hours. That is extremely concerning.”Earlier, Liz Truss also convened a Cobra meeting in Whitehall to discuss the “consular response to the crisis”, after British nationals were advised to leave Ukraine on Friday, while commercial flights remain an option.The foreign secretary, who had a frosty encounter with her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow last week, echoed Mr Johnson’s comments, telling reporters Mr Putin could launch an invasion of Ukraine “almost immediately”.A government source told The Independent: “This is part of our effort to make sure we’re fully prepared. Liz wants to leave nothing to chance.“Her and the PM are leading the last minute diplomatic charge across Europe this week, while at the same time doing everything possible to prepare for an invasion.”Elsewhere, Ukraine’s ambassador to the UK, Vadym Prystaiko, backtracked on suggestions the country could consider dropping its constitutional ambition to join to Nato to avoid war.The country’s foreign minister, Dmytro Kuleba, added: “Ukraine’s strategic course on joining Nato remains unchanged. It is enshrined in our constitution and national foreign policy strategy, supported by a growing majority of Ukrainians. It’s only up to Ukraine and thirty Nato allies to decide on the issue of membership”. More

Boris Johnson’s responses to his Metropolitan Police questionnaire into social gatherings at No 10 will not be made public, Downing Street has said. The prime minister insisted he will have “a lot more” to say on the Partygate scandal once the Scotland Yard probe is concluded.The Met has sent the questionnaire to Mr Johnson and approximately 50 staff members as it investigates a dozen gatherings at No 10 while strict Covid rules were still in place.On an official visit to Scotland, Mr Johnson was asked whether he and his lawyers had responded to the police questionnaire yet.He told reporters: “All that process has got to be completed before I can say anything more, but I look forward to telling you a lot more in due course.”The prime minister’s official spokesman said: “As we said on Friday, we will respond as required. As you know, I think the Met made clear that that was in seven days, so we will comply with that requirement.”Asked if the responses would be made public, the No 10 spokesman said: “No.”Mr Johnson’s allies have told the press that the prime minister plans to argue he was working in his flat on the night of the alleged “Abba party” in November 2020, shortly after senior aide Dominic Cummings left No 10.The prime minister, who has appointed his own lawyer, is also set to claim the three leaving parties he attended were part of his job. “Saying goodbye to staff is part of working life,” a source told The Times.The prime minister has already claimed that he believed “implicitly” that the “bring your own booze” garden party at No 10 in May 2020 was a work event.Defence minister James Heappey said earlier on Monday that the prime minister would argue that he is “not culpable” of the potential Covid offences being probed by the police. “I certainly don’t think the prime minister should volunteer his culpability,” the minister told Sky News. “His argument is that he is not culpable. We should wait and see what the police come back with.”Allies say he will not resign even if he is fined, in a move that would be likely to trigger Tory MPs to force a vote of confidence in his leadership.Fifteen Tory MPs have publicly called for Mr Johnson to quit, while more are thought to have privately written to the 1922 Committee of backbench Tories calling for a no-confidence vote. More are poised to do so if the PM is found to have broken his own coronavirus laws, or further damaging details emerge from the Sue Gray inquiry. He will face a vote of no confidence if 54 Conservative MPs write to 1922 Committee chairman Sir Graham Brady and would be ousted if more than half of his MPs subsequently voted against him.Police are investigating a total of 12 gatherings in Downing Street on eight dates in an inquiry called Operation Hillman, which is examining whether Covid restrictions were broken. Mr Johnson is believed to have attended at least six of the events.Adam Wagner QC, a leading legal expert on Covid rules, has suggested it could take “months” for Scotland Yard to conclude its investigation if Mr Johnson is “lawyered up”. More

Boris Johnson has backed the appointment of a professor who suggested non-white British-born people are not “indigenous” to oversee the levelling up strategy – arguing he has the “right expertise”.The decision to ask Paul Collier to provide analysis on the flagship policy has been condemned by anti-racism campaigners, some likening his language to the British National Party.The academic claimed “the indigenous British” are “a minority” in London because of immigration – arguing people born in this country should count as indigenous only if they have integrated into society.In one TV interview, he also argued immigrants have led to Britons fleeing the capital, asking: “Is London such a great success for the indigenous population?”But Mr Johnson’s spokesperson defended the appointment, declining to criticise his past statements on race, immigration and integration.“There is due diligence undertaken as part of the formal appointment process for those that are on the levelling up board, who were appointed on the basis of their expertise on levelling up,” he said.Arguing that the board will be “representative”, the spokesperson added: “It’s important to get the right expertise and ensure we have a representative sample of individuals who can provide the right advice.“Paul Collier is a well-known economist at the Oxford school of governance and will provide support and analysis on the progress of the 12 missions.”The 72-year-old is a former director of the development research group at the World Bank and was once named by Foreign Policy magazine on its list of top global thinkers.But he has been criticised repeatedly for the statement, in his book Exodus: How Migration is Changing Our World, that: “The 2011 census revealed that the indigenous British had become a minority in their own capital.”In fact, it showed 63 per cent of Londoners were born in this country – and were only a minority if the non-white British-born were excluded.The appointment has been attacked as “deplorable” by a former chair of the Conservative Muslim Forum, and as “dangerous” by a former Tory MEP.And Dr Halima Begum, chief executive of The Runnymede Trust race equality think tank, said: “Referring to indigenous Britons, which is a proxy for white Britons, is the incredibly divisive language used by the British National Party in the 1980s.“What place does such divisive politics have in levelling up, where the purpose is giving everybody a decent job and access to good education?”The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has refused to respond to requests to comment on the criticism, or to discuss Prof Collier’s role.It has also yet to announce other members of the board to advise on levelling up, which has been widely criticised for lacking any new policies or funding. More

Liz Truss defended her decision to hold talks in Moscow with counterpart Sergei Lavrov, insisting she had to deliver a clear message to Russia.The talks between the foreign secretary and Mr Lavrov last week were tense and culminated in an awkward press conference in which the Russian minister appeared to question her understanding of the crisis.On Monday, Ms Truss said “of course, the Russians didn’t like what I had to say” but she had to deliver a message to Vladimir Putin’s government.Ms Truss told reporters at the Foreign Office: “I went to Russia to deliver a very clear message, which is that it’s Russia who is the aggressor, they have 100,000 troops on the Ukrainian border and if they stage an incursion into Ukraine, that would have a damaging effect on the Russian people and the Russian government.“Of course, the Russians didn’t like what I had to say but I say it nevertheless.“And I want them to desist and I want them to be aware that there will be severe costs of an invasion.” More

A Labour government would look at introducing a scheme ‘naming and shaming’ those who are convicted of buying illegal drugs, a shadow minister has suggested.In an apparent toughening of the party’s stance on drug use, Steve Reed, the shadow justice secretary hit out at the “trail of destruction the drugs trade” caused on streets across the country.He also accused the Conservatives of being “soft on crime” and said former Labour prime minister Tony Blair was right in his approach in the 1990s with the slogan “tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime”.Tory cabinet ministers, including the home secretary Priti Patel, have previously floated similar policies, repeatedly vowing to “name and shame” middle-class drug users.But a charity specialising in drug law said it was “nonsense” that naming and shaming could have a deterrent effect, and said both of the main political parties operated in an “evidence free zone” in regards to drug policy.And Labour MP Dan Carden, who chairs the APPG on drugs and alcohol, said the approach would “do little, if anything, to reduce drug usage or tackle violent crime”, but would add to the stigma preventing people seeking support.In an interview with the Daily Mirror, Mr Reed was said to have highlighted a scheme naming and shaming people convicted of buying drugs during his stint as a councillor and leader of Lambeth Council.Asked whether the same could happen under a Labour government, Mr Reed said: “We’d absolutely look at it. It’s important you do it with each locality because they understand what their needs are.“We wanted to send out the signal that, if you think it’s acceptable to come and buy drugs here, and leave behind you the trail of destruction the drugs trade causes on our streets, we will do everything we can to stop you and we will let your friends, family and employers know what you’ve done”.Mr Carden, a former Labour frontbencher, highlighted that drug and alcohol deaths were at record levels, and said “tackling this complex, growing problem requires investment in the evidence-led solutions of treatment and recovery”.“The ‘tough on drugs’ rhetoric is an outdated and ineffective stance on drug policy,” he told The Independent.“Naming and shaming recreational drug users would do little, if anything, to reduce drug usage or tackle violent crime – but would add to the stigma that stops so many people seeking the support they need.“By commissioning the landmark Dame Carol Black Review, the Government has finally started to face up to the failed approach of recent decades. I will continue to press ministers to build on this with a whole-system, health-based approach.”Release, a charity and centre of expertise on drugs and drug law, also told The Independent: “When it comes to drug policy both the main parties are operating in an evidence free zone, the idea that naming and shaming people will act as a deterrent effect is nonsense, drug use in Lambeth certainly did not disappear.“We know what works from countries across the world that have taken a different approach, over 30 jurisdictions have ended criminal sanctions for drug possession offences, and instead have invested in public health responses.”They added: “Labour really need to demonstrate they are the party of evidence, and avoid what they think are populist positions, especially given that nearly two thirds of the public think criminalisation is ‘futile’.” More

David Cameron tried to lobby government ministers to prop up his failing legacy project despite its failure to hit key targets, The Independent can reveal.His intervention on behalf of the National Citizen Service, which he set up in 2011 to run summer residential programmes for 16- and 17-year-olds, came in August 2020 as the government prepared to engage in a root-and-branch youth review to completely re-assess its youth services budget.The former prime minister’s youth scheme had raked in £1.3bn of taxpayers’ money since 2011 – 90 per cent of the youth budget – while the rest of the youth sector suffered cuts of 70 per cent.But earlier this month the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, which conducted the youth review, announced that NCS would have its funding cut to £171M over three years, or £57m a year, a fall from 90 to 30 per cent of the DCMS youth budget. The new culture secretary, Nadine Dorries, is said to be “no fan” of Cameron, having mocked him earlier this year as looking like a “ticket tout”. It followed his decision to withdraw the whip from her in 2012 after she appeared on I’m A Celebrity and failed to disclose her absence to film the show.In summer 2020, Mr Cameron, who drew criticism last year for his lobbying on behalf of since-collapsed finance firm Greensill Capital, tried to persuade then culture secretary Oliver Dowden to back NCS, emails uncovered by a Freedom of Information request show. In an email dated 17 August 2020, Cameron wrote to Mr Dowden: “Dear Oliver, it was good to catch up the other day and encouraging to hear your continued support for NCS. I also appreciate your honesty around the tough decisions that the Treasury will need to make as part of the upcoming CSR [comprehensive spending review]. I promised to share some facts and figures illustrating how NCS is a force for good in society, as well as outline some of the plans for the future direction of travel under the stewardship of Mark Gifford as CEO.”Cameron wrote a long and selective spin detailing how NCS is a force for good, admitting that it “needs to reform” but appealing to Mr Dowden “not to forget its strengths” and claiming that it would “deliver against the government’s levelling-up agenda”. He ended with a plea: “I firmly believe that NCS has never been more needed” and “will only become more so as the country begins to rebuild post-pandemic.” He signed off, “Yours, DC.”Cameron received no reply. A week later, on 24 August, his office sent a follow-up email asking if Mr Cameron’s email had been “safely received”. DCMS responded two hours later: “To confirm that Oliver received and read this email with interest and was very grateful for it. I think he was planning to get back in touch with Mr Cameron directly.”Shadow culture secretary Lucy Powell MP said she took a dim view of Mr Cameron’s attempts to secure favourable treatment for his pet scheme. She said: “Rather than continued lobbying for his side projects, David Cameron should lay low given his disastrous interventions, including on Greensill, which has cost the public dear.”Last year The Independent revealed how Mr Cameron turned a blind eye to the “shocking waste” and failure to meet government targets of his flagship scheme while he was prime minister, ignoring Whitehall and ministerial concerns to instead, as one Whitehall mandarin put it, “stuff NCS’s mouth full of gold”.But in response to questions from The Independent as to whether Mr Cameron’s lobbying had continued after he left office in 2016, NCS chief executive Mark Gifford had sought to distance the NCS “under his tenure” from Cameron, who is still chair of patrons. In response to questions as to whether the NCS board had – during Gifford’s tenure – ever turned to Mr Cameron to lobby No 10, the Treasury or DCMS, Gifford had written: “NCS trust can confirm that the board have not turned to David Cameron to intervene with the government on the trust’s behalf.” He also said that while Cameron was “a great source of advice”, the ex-PM “would never interfere” in their conversations with the government around funding.The new email trail raises questions as to whether Mr Gifford had been kept in the dark about Cameron’s lobbying efforts on his behalf.Asked to explain why he had said Mr Cameron did not lobby DCMS when it was clear he had, Mr Gifford said: “Without seeing the correspondence you say you have, I can only repeat what I have said before. I led the work on securing funding. Mr Cameron did not attend any meetings with me with Ministers or civil servants. I always found him respectful of the process.”Mr Cameron’s office did not respond to requests to comment. More