More stories

  • in

    TV watchdog Ofcom says it wants to regulate Netflix after Jimmy Carr outrage

    The head of UK’s broadcast watchdog Ofcom has said it should regulate online services like Netflix, following a row over a joke by comedian Jimmy Carr.Dame Melanie Dawes, the regulator’s chief executive, said there would be “real value” in extending the organisation’s remit given the shift in the way people watch entertainment. Mr Carr was widely criticised after making a joke about the Holocaust, in which he suggested that it was good that gypsies had been murdered by the Nazis.But the comedian’s programme was only available on online television service Netflix and so is not covered by Ofcom rules – meaning it cannot deal with complaints about the comments. Speaking in an interview with Channel 4 news on Monday evening Dame Melanie was asked whether Ofcom should be able to regulate such online-only shows.“I can certainly see that there’ll be real value in that. Yes. And so we would welcome any chance to work on that,” she said.She added: “I can really understand why a lot of people found that very offensive and as you say, we don’t regulate Netflix at the moment, they’re underneath the Dutch regulator.“And I think that is a concern because it means that for viewers, it’s really confusing that they’ve got different standards applied, for example, to Channel 4 News than they have to YouTube and other services, including Netflix, that come streamed on to our TVs.”Ofcom currently regulates broadcast television, radio, telecoms and the postal service. The regulator licences TV and radio stations, and can revoke licences in the case of a serious breach.It also has the power to levy fines, such as last year when it lapped Russian state-backed channel RT £200,000 for breaching impartiality rules. Ofcom also has the power to sanction channels for causing harm of being grossly offensive.But online streaming services such as Netflix, Disney+, and Amazon Prime are beyond its reach.Culture secretary Nadine Dorries has previously suggested that new laws in the government’s the Media Bill could hold to account streaming sites for airing jokes such as those made by Mr Carr.Downing Street on Monday called the comedian’s comments “deeply disturbing”, but said it was a matter for Netflix whether the comedian’s show should remain online. More

  • in

    Keir Starmer bundled into police car after being swarmed by protesters shouting abuse and Savile slurs

    Boris Johnson is facing demands to apologise after Sir Keir Starmer was targeted by a mob shouting abuse and Jimmy Savile smears outside parliament.Video footage shows the Labour leader being bundled into a police vehicle as protesters shouted “Traitor” and “Jimmy Savile” and accused him of “protecting paedophiles”. Officers were forced to step in to protect Sir Keir, who was walking with shadow foreign secretary David Lammy, as a group followed them from outside Scotland Yard, the headquarters of the Metropolitan Police, to one of the entrances to parliament.It comes just a week after Mr Johnson faced fury from parliamentarians, including his own MPs, after he falsely accused Sir Keir of failing to prosecute Savile while working as director of public prosecutions.One of the prime minister’s senior advisers and a longstanding ally, Munira Mirza, also resigned over the “scurrilous” accusation, while the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, said he would not have made the remark himself.After Monday evening’s incident, the prime minister made no reference to his previous comments in the House of Commons, but said: “The behaviour directed at the leader of the opposition tonight is absolutely disgraceful. “All forms of harassment of our elected representatives are completely unacceptable. I thank the police for responding swiftly.”However, Labour frontbencher Mr Lammy said: “No surprise the conspiracy thugs who harassed Keir Starmer & I repeated slurs we heard from Boris Johnson last week at the despatch box,” adding: “Intimidation, harassment and lies have no place in our democracy. And they won’t ever stop me doing my job.”Former Tory cabinet minister Julian Smith said the scenes were “appalling” and piled pressure on the prime minister, saying: “It is really important for our democracy and for his [Sir Keir’s] security that the false Savile slurs made against him are withdrawn in full.”Tobias Ellwood, the former minister who last week called for Mr Johnson to resign, told the PM: “Apologise please. We claim to be the Mother of Parliaments. Let’s stop this drift towards a Trumpian style of politics from becoming the norm. We are better than this.”Another Tory MP, Robert Largan, said: “Words matter. What we say and how we say it echoes out far beyond Parliament. It can have serious real world consequences. Elected representatives have a responsibility to lower the temperature of debate, not add fuel to the fire.”The Labour MP Chris Bryant told The Independent: “Boris Johnson has incited this and I think he has done it deliberately. There is nothing unintentional about this. He wants this kind of thing to happen, to hide his moral vacuum.“It’s remarkably reminiscent of a year ago, with the storming of the Capitol on 6 January 2021. Silence and refusing to apologise doesn’t cut it. He has to completely withdraw what he said, and do so abjectly.” More

  • in

    Carrie Johnson and the pitfalls of being the PM’s spouse

    Like a few other high-profile roles in public life – Prince of Wales, Olympic gold medal winner, stand-up comedian – there isn’t much of a job description for the role of prime-ministerial spouse.Hence, misunderstandings and controversies have enveloped Carrie Johnson since she took up with the prime minister a couple of years ago. It’s fair to say that few other partners have faced the same sort of intense scrutiny and criticism, with its strains of misogyny – but it is not unprecedented.Interestingly, the last spouse to be bullied and abused to anything like the same extent as Ms Johnson was Cherie Blair.Cherie Booth QC, to give her her professional title, was another career woman, whose work, broadly speaking, touched on political matters. She was, like her husband, a lawyer. They met as pupils under Tony Blair’s future lord chancellor, Derry Irvine, and her career led her to undertake human rights work. Some of her enemies in the press cooked up a theory that the New Labour pledge to introduce the Human Rights Act was a thinly disguised scam to generate more fat fees for Booth’s chambers. The truth, of course, was that the act only brought over to the British courts the work that was being done by British lawyers in the European Court of Human Rights, but they didn’t let that spoil the fun.Ms Blair was also supposedly less deferential to royalty than was her husband – hardly a crime – and possibly a bit more of a socialist. She was supposedly manipulating him towards left-wing extremism, or what is nowadays called “wokery”. It was almost as though she was using hypnotism or sorcery. This was enough for her to be labelled “the wicked witch”. For some reason, perhaps her well-known working-class roots (her father was the actor Tony Booth), her very existence seemed to enrage the Daily Mail in particular. She was also supposed to be too keen on freebies, which is a bit rich coming from a load of journalists, and she invested in property – partly for the benefit of her children, and again, hardly the sort of thing to which Tories are averse. Cherie Blair is an interesting precedent because, like Carrie Johnson, and very unusually among spouses, she was “political”. Indeed, Cherie would probably have gone on to become at least a Labour MP, had Tony not made it first and had she not been such a successful lawyer. It’s the very idea of a woman having independent political opinions and ideas, and discussing them with her husband – an inevitable consequence of their sharing such a lifestyle – that seems to horrify some. By contrast, men with political opinions of their own have been treated very differently. Philip May, who met the young Theresa Brasier through a shared interest in Conservative politics, was almost deferentially referred to as her “most trusted adviser”, and nobody seems to have minded her discussing, say, the merits of the Irish backstop with him over an evening drink. Indeed, it was thought useful for her to get another point of view – that of a typical Conservative activist, and someone with no axe to grind or favours to seek. No one nicknamed him “Prince Philip” or seriously accused him of interference or undue influence. It would also be surprising if the pair of them didn’t occasionally mention, let’s say, her wayward foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, in conversation. After Philip had put the bins out, obviously.The same goes for Denis and Margaret Thatcher, though in that case the pair were both such instinctive Tory reactionaries that they agreed on most things anyway. To the extent that Mr Thatcher did have influence, it was a matter of mild curiosity and gentle satire rather than scandal. Denis was sympathetic to apartheid-era South Africa, where he had business interests and friends, and he perhaps influenced his wife in that direction when it came to sanctions in the 1980s. He thought the BBC, the trade unions and the teaching profession were all infested with communists, and so did she. He backed her in her tussles with powerful figures such as Nigel Lawson and Michael Heseltine. He was partisan. At the end, though, when she was facing a final leadership crisis, he was instrumental in persuading her to resign. Imagine if it got out that Carrie had told Boris the game was up and he ought to quit!Most prime ministers meet their wives or husbands long before they get to No 10. Many know exactly what they are getting involved in, although Mary Wilson thought she was destined for a quiet life as the wife of an Oxford don when she married Harold. In any case, most pairs are well used to each other by the time they get to Downing Street; but Carrie and Boris have had much less time to develop that same sympathy. Carrie has contacts, causes and interests of her own, and unfortunately for her they are viewed with suspicion by some in her party and in government.Far better, in that sense, for Carrie to stick to charity work or a non-political business activity, as Sarah Brown and Samantha Cameron did – but why should she? She’s not a lobbyist. She’s not on staff. Nor is any husband or wife of a prime minister, but they are central to the life of their spouse, and they will make a difference to it.The only prime minister not to have had to worry about their other half’s opinions, or what the press thought about his or her behaviour, was Ted Heath, the lifelong batchelor. Once when Heath was prime minister, or so the story goes, his arch-rival Wilson was walking past No 10 of an evening and looked up at the light on in the flat. Wilson reflected on how lonely poor old Ted must be up there, playing his piano, with no one to share the burdens of a long, wearisome day. By the same token, Carrie doesn’t seem to be given much credit for the sacrifices she makes and the support she gives to her husband. You may recall the coverage of the infamous row the Johnsons had in her flat in June 2019, before Boris became PM, when the police had to be called. Apparently, he told her to “get off my f**king laptop”, and she told him: “You just don’t care for anything because you’re spoilt. You have no care for money or anything.” Living with Mr Johnson is a type of high-pressure public service, if you think about it. It can’t be easy. More

  • in

    Why is the government thinking of using Brexit to ditch EU car safety rules?

    The Independent reported on Monday that the government is threatening to ditch new EU car safety rules – citing the “regulatory freedoms” granted by Brexit. Ministers doubled down when our report was raised in the House of Lords this afternoon, with transport minister Baroness Vere telling peers: “Ministers are considering what we will do. We will make the right decision.”The transport minister claimed the policy change was “nothing to do with Brexit”, though this cannot be the case because if Britain was still in the EU, the regulations would automatically apply.In fact, the UK helped write the rules and played a significant part in getting the package to where it is. A key part of the regulations, “direct vision” standards for lorries – meant to stop cyclists and pedestrians being crushed in blind-spots – were first drawn up by Transport for London and are a British export to Europe, rather than the other way around.Ministers have generally said they are on a drive to cut regulations, but some readers have suggested that dropping the rules will have little practical effect. Will EU car makers, or British-based carmakers hoping to export to the EU, really design their cars differently for the UK?It seems unlikely. But this is actually a clue as to why dropping the rules does matter. To understand why the government wants to do this, we must remember why Brexiteers generally argued for regulatory “freedom” from EU standards in the first place.For many Thatcherite Tories, cutting regulations is an end in itself, but this is not a popular argument to make in public. Instead, the stated justification for stripping out EU rules has, since the referendum, been that it will help the UK sign trade deals with other countries.So will this change affect cars made with the EU market in mind? No, the UK is in that respect a rule-taker, and Brussels will set the standard no matter what, as in so many other areas.But not all cars are made in the EU, or for the EU market. If, to pick a country at random, American cars were bigger and more dangerous and did not meet the standards, they could not be imported to Britain under the tougher regime.Requiring high product standards is what economists call a “non-tariff barrier” to trade. We’re more familiar with this argument on food: the UK does not want to be locked into EU standards on agricultural products, because it would make it harder to sign trade deals with other countries that want to export their food to Britain. Say, to pick a country at random, the US.The thinking in government may be the same with cars: impose EU standards, and trade deals get just that little bit tricker. More

  • in

    French far-right leader Eric Zemmour says Boris Johnson is his role model

    French far-right presidential hopeful Eric Zemmour has nominated Boris Johnson as the world leader he feels he has the most in common with.Mr Zemmour said he was “without doubt” closest to the UK prime minister “culturally, intellectually”.Like Mr Johnson Mr Zemmour is a former journalist who has ridden a tidal wave of populist support – emerging as a challenger to Emmanuel Macron in this year’s election. France will go to the polls in April to elect its next president, with centrist Mr Macron facing three challengers from the far-right to right wing of French politics. Mr Zemmour was asked during an interview with broadcaster France Inter whether he felt other politicians like Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, Italy’s Matteo Salvini or Donald Trump were potential models for him.He replied: “You have not mentioned Boris Johnson and I am astonished because he is without doubt the leader I feel I am closest to, culturally, intellectually”, adding: “He’s obviously a European like me but English.”In November the far-right candidate expressed similar sentiments, stating that he and Mr Johnson “do have a lot in common” More

  • in

    ‘Absolutely not’: Boris Johnson dismisses claims that leadership favourite Rishi Sunak is ‘disloyal’

    Boris Johnson has dismissed suspicions that Rishi Sunak is after his job, as he sought to put his leadership back on track with new cancer waiting times.Amid allegations that the chancellor is blocking a crucial NHS recovery plan because he believes the government is “dying”, the prime minister insisted he retained faith in him.Asked if he had any “doubt about the chancellor’s loyalty”, Mr Johnson replied: “Absolutely not,” as the pair visited an oncology centre in Kent together.The “elective recovery plan” – to confront the huge NHS patient backlog, even before Covid struck – was due to be unveiled on Monday, but was shelved suddenly.Matthew Taylor, the head of the NHS Confederation and a former No 10 policy chief said the episode was reminiscent of Gordon Brown throwing his weight around as Tony Blair’s power waned.But Mr Johnson told ITV News: “Everybody at No 10 and the Treasury are working together in harmony in dealing the big problems that the country faces and clearing the Covid backlog.”He announced new cancer treatment targets intended to ensure that, from March 2023, nobody waits more than two months for their diagnosis.Jeremy Hunt, the Tory chair of the Commons health committee, has raised the alarm over the last-minute delay to the rescue plan – as more than 300,000 patients wait over a year for treatment.“There appears to be an argument about targets which is the last thing the NHS needs: instead they should be discussing where we are going to find the 4,000 additional doctors needed to address the backlog,” he said.Treasury sources have briefed that Mr Sunak was unwilling to sign off on the multi-billion pound NHS recovery plan because its targets are ill-conceived.He appears to fear that the plan will target very long waits – which attract the worst headlines – over patients who have waited less time, but need treatment more urgently.On his hospital visit, Mr Johnson said he wanted the “vast majority” of people who think they may have cancer to get a diagnosis within 28 days.A second target would mean that, by 2028, three-quarters of people with cancer would be diagnosed when that cancer is at an early stage.“We are now working with the NHS to set some tough targets so that we are able to deliver for the patient and also for the taxpayers. We are putting huge sums in,” he said. “Those are very tough targets.”And he added: “It’s thanks to the investment that we’re able to put in, thanks to the sound management of the economy – everything that we did, all the looking after business throughout the pandemic, that’s enabled our economy to bounce back so well – that in turn enables us to put the investment that we need now in the NHS.” More

  • in

    Boris Johnson reboots office in bid to move past 'partygate'

    British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has brought in new senior staffers as he tries to restore his flagging authority — including a communications chief who has called lockdown-breaching government parties “unforgivable.”The prime minister hired Guto Harri, an aide from his days as London mayor who has recently been critical of Johnson, to try to regain control of the government’s messaging after weeks of turmoil that have led some in the ruling Conservatives to call for his removal. He also appointed a senior Cabinet minister, Steve Barclay as his new chief of staff.Visiting a hospital cancer center Monday outside London, Johnson said he was “focused completely” on clearing a backlog of millions of medical procedures built up during the pandemic. It’s one of a pile of critical issues, including a squeeze on household finances from inflation and a looming tax hike, that are being overshadowed by Johnson’s personal woes.“I think what people want is for the government to focus, not on stuff going on at (the government district of) Westminster, but to focus on life … beyond Westminster, and to focus on the needs of the country,” Johnson said. “And that is what we’re doing.”Johnson’s grip on power has been shaken by public anger over revelations that his staff held “bring your own booze” office parties, birthday celebrations and “wine time Fridays” in 2020 and 2021 while millions in Britain were barred from meeting with friends and family because of his government’s COVID-19 restrictions.A total of 16 parties have been investigated by a senior civil servant, Sue Gray with a dozen of them also under investigation by the Metropolitan Police.In an interim report last week into the four parties not under criminal investigation, Gray found that “failures of leadership and judgment” enabled events to occur that “should not have been allowed to take place” and described a Downing Street operation marked by excessive drinking and dysfunctional dynamics.Johnson apologized — without admitting personal wrongdoing — and pledged to fix the problems in his office. But on Friday he was rocked by the departure of five senior staff, including his chief of staff, his communications director and his policy director, Munira Mirza. Mirza, a loyal longtime aide, stood by the prime minister amid the “partygate” revelations. But she said Johnson’s “scurrilous accusation” this week that an opposition leader had failed to stop a notorious pedophile was the final straw.Johnson responded to the departures with a Downing Street shakeup that included the eye-catching appointment of Harri, a former BBC journalist who worked for Johnson at City Hall from 2008 to 2012 but has more recently criticized him. In 2018, Harri called Johnson “sexually incontinent,” and in 2020 he said government communications during the pandemic had been “a masterclass in incompetence.” Last month Harri said reports of parties in Downing Street while Britain was in lockdown were “unforgivable,” though also “understandable in some ways.”Harri told a Welsh-language news site that Johnson greeted him on his first day by singing Gloria Gaynor’s “I Will Survive.”The staff moves are intended to reassure Conservative lawmakers who are debating whether to seek a no-confidence vote in the leader who won them a big parliamentary majority just over two years ago. Under party rules, a no-confidence vote is triggered if 15% of party lawmakers — currently 54 people — write letters calling for one. If Johnson lost such a vote, he would be replaced as party leader and prime minister.Only 15 of the 360 Conservative legislators have publicly called for Johnson to quit, though the number who have written letters is likely higher. Conservative lawmaker Tom Tugendhat, who has already said he will run for leader if Johnson is ousted, said the prime minister’s fate depended on “how the reset goes.”He said “there’s an awful lot of talent going in,” but also “an awful lot of talent coming out.” More

  • in

    Labour demands answers over Boris Johnson’s new spin chief’s lobbying for Huawei

    Labour is demanding answers after it emerged that Boris Johnson’s new spin chief lobbied the government for controversial Chinese tech firm Huawei.Guto Harri came under fire on his first day as No 10’s director of communications over his past work for Hawthorn Advisers, a consultancy firm founded by the co-chair of the Tory party.It was also reported that Mr Harri arranged a six-month leave of absence from the firm – to rescue Mr Johnson’s beleaguered administration – before being required to resign to take up his new role.Angela Rayner, Labour’s deputy leader, seized on the revelation that Mr Harri lobbied for Huawei, which was banned from building the UK’s 5G network because of its close links to the Chinese state.Mr Johnson initially gave the go-ahead with restrictions, before being forced to step back by a Conservative backbench revolt, amid criticism from the White House.“We can’t have the revolving door from lobbying to government see potential national security issues arise,” Ms Rayner said.“We need full transparency from Guto Harri about all contact he had with government in his former role and who his clients were.”Hawthorn Advisers included Huawei as a major client in the two years that Mr Harri, a former BBC journalist, worked at the firm and he had “a hands-on role”, sources told The Sun.A Downing Street source told the newspaper: “This is separate to his new role in No 10. This government is committed to removing Huawei from UK 5G networks by 2027.”And Mr Johnson’s official spokesperson told a Westminster media briefing there was no conflict of interest.“He provided advice to the clients of a private company. That’s entirely legitimate, it’s in the public domain,” said the PM’s spokesperson.“Obviously we wouldn’t exclude from government someone with valuable experience and expertise.“Our position on Huawei is clear. We have strict controls on how Huawei is currently deployed.”He said that anyone taking up work in 10 Downing Street goes through “requisite” security checks and these had been completed for Mr Harri.The PM’s spokesperson said that any meetings Mr Harri had with Mr Johnson or senior Downing Street staff during his time as a lobbyist would be recorded and published in the usual way.“He will be an asset to the prime minister, providing detailed communications advice based on his significant experience,” he said.Lobbying scandals have dogged the government in recent years, in particular the way Greensill Capital joined a government backed loan scheme before its collapse.The Treasury was accused of giving the doomed firm special favours because of fierce lobbying by David Cameron, who was employed by it.The appointment of Mr Harri, who worked for Mr Johnson when he was Mayor of London, has raised eyebrows because of his recent criticisms of his leadership style.In 2018, he warned Mr Johnson was “digging his political grave” with his controversial newspaper columns and that he would be “hugely divisive” as prime minister.Mr Harri also offended “culture war” Tories for taking the knee live on air during a debate about racism towards England’s black footballers, triggering his suspension from the GB News channel.Arriving at work, Mr Harri appeared to signal an end to No 10’s alleged boozing culture, telling reporters his first act was to bring “healthy snacks and mineral water” for staff.Mr Johnson promised Tory MPs big “changes” in the way his government is run, as he fights off the threat of a no-confidence vote in his leadership following the Partygate scandal.A mini-reshuffle is expected to see the removal of Mark Spencer, the chief whip, who has been blamed for failures dating back to the botched attempt to save the disgraced Owen Paterson over a different lobbying scandal. More