UK Politics

Downing Street has refused to commit to a public announcement of any fixed penalty notice issued by police to Boris Johnson or No 10 staff as a result of the Partygate investigation.And The Independent understand that the Metropolitan Police are not planning to name anyone fined in relation to the probe, raising the prospect that sanctions taken against the prime minister and his staff could remain secret.Mr Johnson and others working and living in Downing Street could face fines of £100 or more if they are found guilty of breaching Covid lockdown regulations at one of 12 gatherings under investigation by the Metropolitan Police. In the most serious cases, for organisers of large parties, the fines could reach £10,000But the prime minister’s spokesperson today said it was a matter for police to decide whether they want to publicise the outcome of the investigation. The Metropolitan Police is not currently planning to name anyone fined as a result of the investigation, unless they contest the penalty and are prosecuted in open court.The Independent understands it is planning to make public what fines have been given over which of the 12 gatherings under investigation, but without identifying recipients.The development came as internal Tory critics of the prime minister mulled their response to Monday’s release of an abridged report into the Partygate affair by senior civil servant Sue Gray.One backbench MP today suggested that those wishing to oust the PM may wait to send letters of no confidence to the chair of the 1922 Committee in order to ensure that any vote on Johnson’s future takes place at a time when it is most likely to succeed.Committee chair Sir Graham Brady must call a vote if he receives letters from 54 MPs – 15 per cent of the total. But if Mr Johnson survives the vote by winning the support of 180 or more of his MPs, he cannot be challenged again for another year.Mid-Derbyshire MP Pauline Latham told BBC Derby: “People write to me and say, ‘Put in letters to Sir Graham Brady’. There’s no point in doing that at this time. “[Sir Graham] needs 54 letters. If he gets them, there will then be a vote of no confidence in the prime minister. At this point of time he would win that vote of confidence, which automatically gives him a year.“What we need to do is wait and see. And when it’s the right time, when things change, if they need to change, then we can go for it. But it’s no good going now – you just get an extra year.”Ms Latham said that Mr Johnson’s promise to shake up Downing Street and create an Office of the Prime Minister was enough to satisfy her “at the current time”.There has been a complete mess at No 10,” she said. “He’s promised to change that. “He did appear contrite, saying he needs to get this right. I think he realises it’s the end of the road if he doesn’t.”Downing Street refused on Monday to commit to the publication of Ms Gray’s full report on the Partygate affair once the police investigation is concluded, only to U-turn swiftly after a furious response from Tory backbenchers.But asked whether No 10 was committed to making public the details of any fines imposed by police, Mr Johnson’s official spokesperson told a Westminster media briefing: “It is a matter for the police what they way in that regard.”In the first instance, any breaches of Covid laws will be punished using written “fixed penalty notices”, which can range between £100 and £10,000 depending on the date and size of the gathering, and the person’s role.Where a fine is disputed, police can decide to pursue a prosecution in a magistrates’ court, where the person’s name and details would be made public. But if a fine is paid, no further action is taken.The Independent understands that Scotland Yard is not planning to name anyone fined over “partygate” because it is not its normal practice for fines and other punishments not involving court cases. More

Nadine Dorries has been widely criticised for an “extraordinary” interview in which she repeatedly insisted Boris Johnson “tells the truth” hours after he spread misinformation in the House of Commons.The culture secretary was interviewed by Channel 4 on Monday after the PM made false claims against Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer.Sue Gray’s report had blasted Mr Johnson for failures of leadership in regards to the Downing Street gatherings during lockdown.But, in trying to deflect from the Partygate controversy and calls for him to resign, Mr Johnson accused Sir Keir of having failed to prosecute paedophile TV presenter Jimmy Savile when he was head of the Crown Prosecution Service. The PM made the claims in the Commons to retaliate against the Labour leader’s criticism of him and his government over the Gray report.In a clip watched millions of times online, Ms Dorries is asked by Channel 4 News presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy about the “clearly untrue allegation” that Sir Keir – when Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) – was “responsible for not prosecuting Jimmy Savile”.Standing in the Commons lobby, he asks: “How can you have a prime minister just repeating fake news like that?”Ms Dorries – whose department has vowed to tackle misinformation – replies: “There were things that Keir Starmer said, as someone who was the former Director of Public Prosecutions, shouldn’t have said at the despatch box.”She goes on to say that Sir Keir “shouldn’t have prejudged what the [Metropolitan Police’s investigation into Partygate] is going to find”.Mr Guru-Murthy continues to say that the PM has said things that are “untrue” and that he “misled that House today”.Ms Dorries pulls a face and says that was “not the case” and that there were “a lot of things Keir Starmer shouldn’t have said”.Mr Guru-Murthy says: “Clearly there are things [Mr Johnson] said that are not true.”Then she replies twice in a row, while glancing occasionally at the camera: “The Prime Minister tells the truth.”The footage has gone viral, with many people likening the “car-crash” interview to a Catherine Tate comedy sketch.Pete Wishart, an SNP MP, said: “There is never any way that getting Nadine Dorries out to ‘defend’ you could ever be anything other than a disaster. This is something else.”Writer and actor Adil Ray described the interview as “extraordinary”.He said: “Wow. The Nadine Dorries interview just now with @krishgm was just extraordinary. Struggling to hold on and hold it together. Almost laughing at her own defence.”John Nicholson, the SNP’s shadow culture secretary said: “Disgraceful. Nadine Dorries is not fit for office. And frightenly disinformation falls within my opposite number’s brief.”Behavioural psychologist Jo Hemmings suggested that Ms Dorries had a cult-like dedication to the PM.She tweeted that Mr Guru-Murthy’s question ‘is there anything the PM could do that would stop your unwavering support?’ could have been “addressed to any of those unscrupulous MPs who refuse to acknowledge the truth.”Ms Hemmings added: “There are cults with less blind loyalty.”Tory MP Julian Smith said: “The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Saville yesterday is wrong & cannot be defended. It should be withdrawn. “False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust & can’t just be accepted as part of the cut & thrust of parliamentary debate.”In the Commons earlier on Monday, Mr Johnson said former DPP Sir Keir had used his time “prosecuting journalists and failing to prosecute Jimmy Savile”.He then said it would be “entirely wrong” for Sir Keir to “prejudge” the police inquiry into Partygate.Nazir Afzal, a former chief Crown prosecutor for the North West, branded the PM’s claim about Sir Keir and Savile “a disgrace to parliament and office of prime minister”.He added: “It’s not true. I was there. Keir Starmer had nothing to do with the decisions taken. On the contrary, He supported me in bringing 100s of child sex abusers to justice.” More

The UK government’s replacement for the EU’s regional development funding leaves regions billions of pounds worse off, devolved administrations have said. The Conservatives’ 2019 manifesto pledged to “at a minimum” match the £1.5 billion a year EU structural funds doled out by Brussels before Brexit.But calculations by the Welsh government suggest the UK Shared Prosperity Fund would leave the country “close to £1bn” worse off over the next three years.Wales will get £750m less in structural funds and £242m less in agricultural support for farmers than it would have in the EU.Vaughan Gething, the Welsh government’s economy minister, told the Financial Times newspaper that the cuts were a “straightforward breach of the manifesto pledge”.Other parts of the UK are also set to lose out from the UK’s replacement fund.A pre-white paper analysis produced by the Northern Powerhouse Partnership found that the government “is planning to spend less on English regional development than previous Conservative governments despite levelling up being a flagship policy”.”The annual spending of Shared Prosperity Fund and Levelling Up Fund in England is expected to be around£1.5bn per year. This compares with an annual £2.1bn spend under the ERDF, ESF and Local Growth Fund,” it says.According to the partnership’s analysis, “most sub-regions of England, except Cornwall, are at risk of seeing their regional development funding cut”.In the Tees Valley, annual funding could be cut from £46m to £21m, while in the Leeds City Region funding will fall from £149m per annum to £72m.The analysis also warns that “the north of England is at risk of seeing double the per-person per-year reduction than the England average”.Northern Ireland is also expected to see a reduction, the former losing £65 million a year – according to an official presentation to the Stormont budget committee.As reported by The Independent in October, the funding pot provided by the government will be just £2.6bn over three years, rather than the pledged £4.5bn.The department for levelling up said in a statement: “We have been clear throughout that UK-wide funding for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund — worth over £2.6bn [over three years] — will ramp up to at least match receipts from EU structural funds, which on average reached around £1.5bn per year.” More

Two years since Britain left the EU, Brexit is still very much at the top of the news agenda with lorry queues lengthening at Dover as exporting firms struggle with red tape.On Monday, fears were raised that a ‘bonfire’ of EU laws on everything from data privacy to road standards could be forced through behind parliament’s back under new plans to seize “Brexit freedoms”. This followed a report over the weekend that British shoppers are facing less choice and higher prices as food suppliers give up on the UK.Meanwhile, Boris Johnson’s government has claimed that Brexit has already proved a “big success”.To mark two years since ‘Brexit Day’, The Independent’s journalist Adam Forrest was on hand to answer reader questions on all things Brexit from lorry queues to trade deals and the protocol. If you want to sign up to Forrest’s Brexit and Beyond newsletter, bringing the latest updates on Brexit to your inbox, click in the box at the top of this article after filling out your email address or you can click here.How is the government can claim the queues at Dover have nothing to do with Brexit?The government has said it is “untrue” to blame Brexit – claiming queues are due to ferry re-fits. But drivers, customs agents, freight forwarders, union officials and even the Dover port’s own chief exec have all pointed to customs checks as the reason for delays. Each haulier is taking 10 to 20 minutes to clear checks. The additional time for checks was down to the codes needed for government’s new Goods Vehicle Movement Service (GVMS) system and other export paperwork. Though this has been the case since last January, companies had 60 days to fill in customs forms after exporting last year. But since 1 January, the forms have to completed in full – adding to lengthier checks.Isn’t the problem new requirements on UK businesses having to import from the EU?Even longer delays have been experienced on the French side at Calais because of the extra red tape needed for imports from the EU into the UK since 1 January. Lorry drivers have reported queueing for up to eight hours to get through controls, partly because UK firms have struggled with complex new customs declarations and rules-of-origin forms. And if there is a problem with paperwork, then the trucks have been pulled aside – some trucks have been in lorry parks for several days until problems can be sorted out.Please could you comment on why this story is not being picked up by mainstream media apart from yourselves?To be fair, lots of media outlets have started picking up on the queues, and the potential that serious delays could cause problems. The worrying thing is that it could get worse and disrupt supply chains. There’s a good possibility firms will make fewer mistakes and get in the swing of things. But … checks just take time. And the overall volume of imports / exports and car traffic will start picking from next month. There are stricter checks coming in July akin to those already taking place on food being shipped from the UK to the EU. And then there are extra biometric checks coming into force in late September, as the EU’s new Entry/Exit System (EES) comes in.Will Liz Truss and the government trigger Article 16?It’s possible, but unlikely … Liz Truss has said there is a “deal to be done” and suggested February would be the time to do it – before political campaigning starts for May elections in Northern Ireland. She has a strong incentive to do some kind of deal – even a limited one to ease some food safety checks (so-called sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) controls). With a cost of living and Ukraine invasion crises on the horizon, there seems little interest in a trade war with the EU.What happens if the DUP decides to stop all the Brexit checks themselves?DUP first minister Paul Givan said last week his DUP colleague agriculture minister Edwin Poots would order a stop to the checks in NI soon. They appear to think they have the authority if the deal does not have consent at the NI executive. Liz Truss said last week it was a “matter for the executive”. The pressure is on Truss to achieve a deal in February, or the DUP could take the matter out of her hands. Even if there a limited deal which doesn’t remove all checks, the DUP still has the potential to cause a lot of trouble.Could you see a situation where the UK re-joins the EU in the next decade?It’s hard to imagine real clamour of another referendum anytime soon. The anti-Brexit campaigner Michael Heseltine suggested recently it could be looked at soon if key Leave campaigner Boris Johnson is kicked out of No 10. It’s wishful thinking, let’s be honest. But things do change, subtly, over time. It’s not impossible to imagine a campaign building in future decades. Remainer Tory MP Tom Tugendhat – declaring himself a contender in the event of leadership contest – let slip over the weekend that there was “no way we’re going back into the EU for a generation, whatever that is, 30, 40 years”.What is the price an average family pays for ‘the freedom of’ Brexit’?Brexit will mean a four per cent long-term decline to UK’s GDP, according to an estimate by the government’s Office for Budget Responsibility at the time of the last Budget. About £80bn a year, which is a lot of money. And the short-term impact is already clear. The UK’s trade in goods is 15.7 per cent, around £12.6bn – lower than it would have been we’d stayed in the single market and customs union (according to CER analysis of government data). So it’s bad already, with no credible estimate suggesting it won’t stay bad for years to come.These questions and answers were part of an ‘Ask Me Anything’ hosted by Adam Forrest at 3pm on Monday 31 January. Some 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.Do you have any topics you’d like to see an expert host an ‘Ask Me Anything’ on? Let us know your suggestions in the comments below. More

Deputy prime minister Dominic Raab admitted he “doesn’t have the facts” to substantiate Boris Johnson’s false claim in the Commons that Sir Keir Starmer was behind the failure to prosecute Jimmy Savile.The prime minister’s jibe about the Labour leader failing to prosecute Savile in his former role as director of public prosecutions has been completely discredited, sparking condemnation from MPs in all parties.Mr Raab initially claimed Mr Johnson’s remark was simply “part of the cut and thrust of parliamentary debates” – but when challenged to repeat the claim, admitted he could not.The cabinet minister admitted on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I can’t substantiate that … I’m certainly not repeating it. I don’t have the facts to justify that.”Senior Tory MP Julian Smith, former chief whip, attacked both the prime minister’s “smear” and Mr Raab’s claim they could be considered the normal “cut and thrust” of the Commons.“The smear made against Keir Starmer relating to Jimmy Saville yesterday is wrong and cannot be defended. It should be withdrawn,” he tweeted.“False and baseless personal slurs are dangerous, corrode trust and can’t just be accepted as part of the cut and thrust of parliamentary debate.”For Tory chair Baroness Warsi also attacked the “false and baseless smears” regarding Saville – saying they “cannot be defended”. She tweeted: “PM should withdraw his comments.”Another senior Tory MP told The Independent that they were also “deeply disappointed and disgusted” that Mr Johnson repeated a slur against Starmer.Responding on Tuesday, Sir Keir said Mr Johnson’s claim was “a ridiculous slur peddled by right wing trolls” – saying many Tory MPs had shared their dismay with him.He told Sky News: “The disgust on the faces of Conservatives MPs that their prime minister was debasing himself by sinking so law was clear … many of them expressed that to me.”In 2020, fact-checking charity Full Fact also looked into the claim that Sir Keir had stopped Savile being charged in 2009 – a claim which has also been perpetuated by far-right groups on social media.Full Fact said that while Sir Keir was head of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) when the decision not to prosecute Savile was made on the grounds of “insufficient evidence”, he was not central to the decision.Nazir Afzal, a former chief Crown prosecutor for the north west, responded to the PM’s false claim by branding it “a disgrace to parliament and office of prime minister”.Meanwhile, Sir Keir said Mr Johnson had “taken the public for fools” and should resign over partygate scandal before the Metropolitan Police investigation concludes.“The prime minister broke the rules, the prime minister lied about having broken the rules,” he told BBC Breakfast. More

The full findings of a police investigation into parties in No 10 Downing Street should be made public, deputy prime minister Dominic Raab has said. Speaking on Sky News this morning, the justice secretary was asked whether Boris Johnson will publish the full report once the police have completed their investigation. He replied: “Yes, if there are any subsequent findings from Sue Gray.” Punishments for those who have broken the rules could be limited to fixed penalty notices, which might not be publicly disclosed, but Mr Raab, the deputy prime minister, said “justice must be done and seen to be done”.This comes after the first update of the Sue Gray report was published yesterday revealing police are investigating 12 separate gatherings – including three that Boris Johnson is known to have attended and one in the prime minister’s Downing Street flat – to find out whether coronavirus lockdown laws were broken.However, the Cabinet minister said Mr Johnson “believes he acted in good faith at all times”, suggesting the prime minister does not think he personally did anything wrong.Officers are examining hundreds of documents and photographs in relation to the 12 events in 2020 and 2021 held while England was under coronavirus restrictions.The evidence was passed to the police by the investigation team led by senior official Sue Gray whose interim report on Monday highlighted “failures of leadership and judgment” at the heart of government but did not point the finger of blame at any individuals.Her conclusions were limited following a request by the Metropolitan Police to make only limited references to the events under investigation, leaving it to Scotland Yard to decide whether laws were broken.Asked whether Mr Johnson should quit if he is issued with a fixed penalty notice for breaching coronavirus rules, Mr Raab said: “Let’s wait and see … Allow the police to conduct their investigation and see, when they have ascertained the facts, quite what they conclude.”The police are examining around 300 photographs as part of the investigation into the alleged parties.Asked why there are so many pictures of gatherings which were claimed to be work events, Mr Raab told Sky News that is a “good question”.Mr Johnson’s position appears to be secure for now following a meeting with Tory MPs and peers on Monday night and the prime minister’s promise to make major changes to his Downing Street operation.Mr Johnson also committed to publishing a fuller version of Ms Gray’s report once the police investigation has concluded – although it is not clear how detailed that will be and whether it will include the evidence submitted to the police.“Anything she gives the prime minister he will publish, but ultimately that’s a question for Sue Gray and the timing will depend on the police investigation,” Mr Raab told LBC Radio.“I understand that there are the individual claims of breaches, of allegations, which must go to the police to investigate.“It’s not clear to me that there is anything more, other than any conclusions that she will draw once that investigation is concluded, that will come forward.”The prime minister also highlighted a greater role for Australian election guru Sir Lynton Crosby in an effort to bolster his support on the Tory benches.Mr Raab said Sir Lynton “has got a good strategic nose and a good sense of the direction of public opinion”.Mr Johnson endured a difficult time in the Commons chamber on Monday, where he told MPs: “I’m sorry for the things we simply didn’t get right and also sorry for the way this matter has been handled.”But asked on Today what precisely the Prime Minister is personally sorry about, Mr Raab said: “He recognised that, as Sue Gray said, the standards expected in No 10 were not as they should have been.”The deputy prime minister said Mr Johnson “takes the organisational responsibility” for the failures identified but he was not commenting on individual cases because of the police investigation.Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer repeated his call for Mr Johnson to quit.“The prime minister broke the rules, the prime minister lied about having broken the rules,” he told the BBC.“The prime minister had to start an investigation by Sue Gray and the prime minister’s brought a criminal investigation upon himself.“It’s no good him trying to blame politicians in general. There’s one person at the centre of this who has caused all of those problems and is subject to a criminal investigation because of his own behaviour.“That’s why I genuinely think that the time has come for him to go.”Tory former Cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell, who publicly told Mr Johnson in the Commons that he longer supports him , said No 10 is being run like a “medieval court”.“I think this is a crisis that is not going to go away and is doing very great damage to the party,” he told Today.“It is more corrosive, in my judgment, than the expenses scandal was, and it will break the coalition that is the Conservative Party.”SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford, who was thrown out of the Commons chamber on Monday after accusing the prime minister of misleading Parliament, defended his actions.“I’m to be punished because I’ve stood up for my constituents and stood up for the millions of people in the United Kingdom that feel real anger,” he told the BBC.“I have a duty to do what I have been sent to Westminster to do.” More

Boris Johnson has vowed to bring back his former election guru Sir Lynton Crosby in a bid to save his premiership, as he attempts to persuade Conservative MPs there will be a major changes at No 10.The prime minister told Tory MPs that the Australian strategist would return to advise him, as he fought to calm anger over partygate after the publication of a censored version of the Sue Gray report.Deputy PM Dominic Raab confirmed that Sir Lynton would return to help the government “focus on voters’ priorities”, saying MPs desperately wanted the party to “get back to doing the job”.He told LBC: “Lynton Crosby is an important element of that. He has got a good strategic nose and a good sense of the direction of public opinion … to make sure we are nailing the priorities of the people.”MPs were said to have cheered at a tense behind-closed-door meeting on Monday evening when the prime minister revealed a role for the Australian election guru behind his successful London mayoral campaigns.Dubbed the “Wizard of Oz”, Sir Lynton also acted at strategist from the Conservative Party during the general election campaigns in 2015 and 2017.Leader of the Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg said he had not heard any calls for Mr Johnson to go at Monday night’s meeting – telling reporters the PM had “managed to maintain the support of the party pretty much throughout”.There was no immediate sign of the flood of confidence letters to Sir Graham Brady, the chair of the backbench 1922 Committee, which would trigger a vote on Mr Johnson’s future as Tory leader if they pass the threshold of 54.Mr Johnson announced plans to reshape No 10 as an Office of the Prime Minister led by a permanent secretary, as well as to enforce codes of conduct for civil servants and special advisers more stringently.Rebel MPs expressed scepticism about the overhaul, however. Former Tory minister Andrew Mitchell said Mr Johnson was running government like a “medieval court”, and said partygate was more damaging than the expenses scandal.Mr Mitchell – who announced that he had lost confidence in the PM in the Commons on Monday – told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I think this is a crisis that is not going to go away and is doing very great damage to the party.”He added: “It is more corrosive in my judgement than the expenses scandal was and it will break the coalition that is the Conservative Party.”Former Conservative leader William Hague also warned that the PM “should be very worried” about his fightback, as he criticised his apology to the Commons.Writing in The Times, Mr Hague said Mr Johnson had plenty of time to craft a substantial response which gave his critics “pause for thought”, but instead “decided to do the minimum”.“The prime minister could have got on the front foot … yet this very intuitive politician decided to do the minimum in responding to the report rather than go further in his apology and his proposals. Instead of reinforcing the momentum in his favour, he quite possibly stalled it.”Former Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson was in tears in Channel 4 News on Monday evening, saying she has been left “upset” by the partygate scandal and did not think Mr Johnson can recover.Meanwhile, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said Mr Johnson had “taken the public for fools” and should resign before the police investigation concludes. “The prime minister broke the rules, the prime minister lied about having broken the rules,” he told BBC Breakfast. More